I guess it is my fault. I forwarded it to various people, probably just not to the right ones ;-)
Lukas On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> wrote: > Because marcus was not aware of it. > I will add it this evening (if nobody does it before). > > Stef > > On Mar 31, 2009, at 10:35 PM, Lukas Renggli wrote: > >>> on the closure related note, what is perhaps interesting in a >>> workspace is >>> >>> values := (1 to: 5) collect: [:each | [each] ]. >>> values collect: [:each | each value] >>> --> #(1 2 3 4 5) >> >> That's correct. >> >>> | i | >>> values := (1 to: 5) collect: [:each | >>> i := each. >>> [i] ]. >>> values collect: [:each | each value] >>> -->#(5 5 5 5 5) >> >> That behavior is correct. i is defined outside the block, thus it >> refers to the current number which is 5. >> >>> values := OrderedCollection new. >>> 1 to: 5 do: [:i | values add: [i] ]. >>> values collect: [:each | each value] >>> --> an OrderedCollection(6 6 6 6 6) >> >> That's a bug, but already fixed by Eliot. I don't know why the patch >> is not included with the image? Load the attachement. >> >> The two other failing tests are actually failing in most Smalltalk, >> even in commercial ones. >> >> Lukas >> >> -- >> Lukas Renggli >> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch >> <TempVariableNode- >> analyseClosure.st>_______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
