Re: Implicit Globals - A (better?) compile time solution.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Implicit Globals - A (better?) compile time solution.
- From: Miles Bader <miles@...>
- Date: 2008年2月23日 23:12:36 +0900
Roberto Ierusalimschy <roberto@inf.puc-rio.br> writes:
> Maybe a (partial?) solution to the implicit global problem would be to
> follow the style of strict.lua, but at compile time. There would be
> only one rule:
Yes, I think that would be a good change (and _much_ better than all
this "implicit local" silliness)....
> To use a global inside a function, you may need to "declare" it. If the
> global belongs to the chunk, a simple "name = nil" in the global level
> will do. Otherwise you may use something like "name = name". It is
> strange, but it is (or should be) uncommon for a function to mess with
> globals declared elsewhere.
Personally I'd favor a real declaration syntax of some sort
(e.g. "global VAR"), but I guess you're loathe to add a new keyword...
Heh, how about:
not local VAR
... doesn't add any new keywords... :-)
-Miles
--
Immortality, n. A toy which people cry for, And on their knees apply for,
Dispute, contend and lie for, And if allowed Would be right proud
Eternally to die for.