This is because of compilation optimization. 2013/7/22 Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]>
> Hi > > when I execute the following > > first > "Bexp new first" > | temp | > temp := 2. > [ temp. > thisContext inspect.] value. > ^ temp > > tmp in the inspector is nil and does not hold 2 and I was wondering why. > I thought that thisContext was returning the blockContext > In the outercontext of thisContext blockClosure, tmp is also nil. > > This is because here 'temp.' is evaluated for effect (the value is not stored anywhere) and it has no side effect (reading a variable cannot lead to a modification of state of another object). So the compiler removes it. As it is removed, it is the same as if it was not in the block. So the block cannot access temp. Now write 'temp:= #foo' or 'temp foo' you will get it. > first > "Bexp new first" > | temp | > temp := 2. > [ temp. > temp traceCr. > thisContext inspect.] value. > ^ temp > > output 2 on the transcript. > > In this case 'temp.' is still removed, but the value of temp still need to be copied in the block for ' temp traceCr.'.'temp traceCr' is also evaluated for effect, but has the side effect to output the transcript, so the compiler cannot remove it. Basically the is very few things that the compiler removes, and one of them is variable read for effect, because you are sure it cannot lead to any issue. > Stef > >
