On 04/07/13 10:00, Martin Phillips wrote: >> From Martin's response, I'm guessing not for QM, either. > > In QM, the @1, @2, etc variables are simply local variables within the I-type > expression. This gives us the useful advantage of > being able to nest compound I-type but does, as you suggest, prevent their > use to retain values across uses of the I-type. > This is, iirc, what the documentation for UV also *claims*.
It is a "feature" that it can be used to retrieve the result from the previous evaluation. Another difference between variants of the @ function ... which bit me when we switched from PI-Open to UV ... On PI, when one i-descriptor referenced another, it pulled in the compiled code as a "subroutine" or something like that. So you could combine i-descriptors that used this technique. On UV, it pulls in the source. So if an i-descriptor calls another i-descriptor using this technique you get nasty, subtle or not so subtle, breakage. Cheers, Wol _______________________________________________ U2-Users mailing list [email protected] http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
