On 1-Sep-07, at 4:57 AM, Slava Pestov wrote: > Ed, > > This is an excellent idea, I'll implement it.
On second thought, terrible idea :) The position of the local on the retain stack is not a property of the local, but if the local+current lexical scope. So there's no one definition of 'b' that would work. That's why you need the closure conversion. I will make 'see' work with ::-words, and that will alleviate some of the pain. Not sure what to do with the single stepper though. I think locals will always be second-class; I'd like to keep the implementation simple instead of striving for a full embedding of Scheme in Factor. Slava ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Factor-talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
