On Feb 11, 2006, at 9:02 PM, Kevin Toppenberg wrote:
So in this code
for i=1:1:1000 do
. new VAR
. set VAR=i
Then the frame containing VAR is popped/discarded at the end of each
loop, because the do block has concluded, right? We don't get 1000
pushes onto the stack, right?
Thanks for you help.
Kevin
One thing I've been thinking about lately is what kinds of
opportunities there are for optimization in a language like MUMPS. In
principle, those NEWs could just be optimized away, but with its
support for dynamic execution, you have the problem of someone coming
along and trying to execute code that you discarded or modified. Not
a good thing.
===
Gregory Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but
when there is nothing left to take away."
-- Antoine de Saint-Exupery
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=103432&bid=230486&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
