You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: 1-js/06-advanced-functions/03-closure/10-make-army/solution.md
+3-3Lines changed: 3 additions & 3 deletions
Display the source diff
Display the rich diff
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ Let's examine what exactly happens inside `makeArmy`, and the solution will beco
88
88
89
89
Here `let j = i` declares an "iteration-local" variable `j` and copies `i` into it. Primitives are copied "by value", so we actually get an independent copy of `i`, belonging to the current loop iteration.
90
90
91
-
The shooters work correctly, because, the value of `i` now lives a little bit closer. Not in `makeArmy()` Lexical Environment, but in the Lexical Environment that corresponds the current loop iteration:
91
+
The shooters work correctly, because the value of `i` now lives a little bit closer. Not in `makeArmy()` Lexical Environment, but in the Lexical Environment that corresponds the current loop iteration:
92
92
93
93
94
94
@@ -117,11 +117,11 @@ Let's examine what exactly happens inside `makeArmy`, and the solution will beco
117
117
army[5](); // 5
118
118
```
119
119
120
-
That's essentially the same, because,`for` on each iteration generates a new lexical environment, with its own variable `i`. So `shooter` generated in every iteration references its own `i`, from that very iteration.
120
+
That's essentially the same, because `for` on each iteration generates a new lexical environment, with its own variable `i`. So `shooter` generated in every iteration references its own `i`, from that very iteration.
121
121
122
122
123
123
124
-
Now, as you've put so much effort into reading this, and the final recipe is so simple - just use `for`, you may wonder -\- was it worth that?
124
+
Now, as you've put so much effort into reading this, and the final recipe is so simple - just use `for`, you may wonder -- was it worth that?
125
125
126
126
Well, if you could easily answer the question, you wouldn't read the solution. So, hopefully this task must have helped you to understand things a bit better.
0 commit comments