On Sat, 7 Oct 2006 at 3:32pm, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
>
> Hari Krishna Dara wrote:
>
> > The :lockvar and :unlockvar commands fail when there is a recursive
> > references. E.g., try the below:
> >
> > :let a = {}
> > :let b = {}
> > :let a.b = b
> > :let b:a = a
> > :lockvar! a
> > E743: variable nested too deep for (un)lock
> >
> > You could of course end up with more complicated indirect recursive
> > references as well, so it should guard against it.
>
> Although it's correct as such, I know a trick to detect the same list or
> dictionary is encountered a second time, and then don't recurse into it.
Does that mean you will provide a patch? Also note that it could be
a self recursion too (:let a.a = a).
> > Also, just noticed that string() fails as well.
> >
> > :echo string(a)
> > E724: variable nested too deep for displaying
>
> This is much harder to avoid. It's very well possible that a list or
> dictionary appears multiple times without a recursive reference. In
> that case it should be listed normally. It's not easy to distinguish a
> normal reference from a recursive reference.
Why is it hard to distinguish a direct reference and indirect reference?
In any case, this functionality is not much of a use unless you really
want to be able to restore the original structure using eval(), but I
doubt if string() has special semantics to preserve identities.
> > There are probably others that would fail as well.
>
> What others?
I just meant there could be others, but I looked at the list there
shouldn't be any others.
--
Thanks,
Hari
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
