Re: local keyword in the global scope, and other things.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: local keyword in the global scope, and other things.
- From: Sam Roberts <sroberts@...>
- Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2006 17:43:18 -0800
On Thu, Nov 09, 2006 at 09:27:55AM +0800, Simon Wittber wrote:
> On 11/9/06, Thomas Lefort <thomas.lefort@gmail.com> wrote:
> >Do you really need threads ? Or can you solve concurrency issues by
> >softer means ?
>
> I'm primarily interested in exploiting multi-core architectures in a
> high level language, like Lua. Not many dynamic, high level languages,
> support genuine concurrency across multiple CPUs/cores. I've
> investigated Ruby, Python, and a few Scheme dialects.
Yes, its a strength of lua, even though you'll continually hear the "use
coroutines instead" refrain.
> >> What is the purpose of using the local keyword in the global scope?
> >
> >Same as in any scope, why ?
>
> Ah, I didn't understand that each file (which I know know as a
> 'chunk') has it's own scope. I understand what this does now.
It's only a chunk after you load it...
local intruduces a new lexically scoped variable. Try:
local foo = 4
-- function's use of foo is bound to the one above
function p() print(foo) end
-- this also uses that foo
foo = 5
-- so this prints 5
p()
-- but this made a new local called foo
local foo = 6
-- which is unrelated to the foo seen by function p, and which
-- function p still refers to, even though it is no longer in
-- the current "scope"
p()
~