Phil Dawes wrote:
> > Having just read this again, I'd be inclined to use a local namespaced
> > variable rather than a global one just because it might be used across
> > threads. If that's the case, doesn't VAR:s boil down to the same thing?
Ed wrote:
> There's no distinction between "global" and "local" variables. We have a
> namestack which is a stack of namespaces. The only thing that's special
> about 'set-global' instead of 'set' is that it jumps to the first namespace
> and sets the variable value there instead of the last namespace. The last
> namespace is the "top" of the namestack; i.e. the most immediate. So when
> you do 'set-global' it isn't promoting the variable to any special status
> or anything like that. The 'set' word operates on the most immediate
> namespace. The 'set*' word searches the namestack until it finds a binding
> and sets it there. 'set*' is the closest to 'set!' in a Scheme
> implementation.
Eh, so just to be clear, you should be able to stick this in your vocabulary
(at the top level):
CHAR: , delimiter set-global
and everything will work fine. You'll be able to remove the 'init-vars' word
and all calls to it. Folks will still be able to rebind 'delimiter' anytime
they want.
Ed
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Factor-talk mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
