Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.ruby > #2920
| Path | csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!feeder.news-service.com!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder2.enfer-du-nord.net!talisker.lacave.net!lacave.net!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Kevin Mahler <kevin.mahler@yahoo.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.ruby |
| Subject | Re: scope of assignments with lambda |
| Date | Fri, 15 Apr 2011 01:37:17 -0500 |
| Organization | Service de news de lacave.net |
| Lines | 43 |
| Message-ID | <90f821efcacb67d7fe0de170d6979e29@ruby-forum.com> (permalink) |
| References | <5ab8b94d707235d7b83c9b011b696ef4@ruby-forum.com> <2b8e0c638f80e0062cbba1f68ca297d8@ruby-forum.com> <470a9e96982d7a927f140193f12c0f64@ruby-forum.com> |
| NNTP-Posting-Host | bristol.highgroove.com |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=UTF-8 |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| X-Trace | talisker.lacave.net 1302850299 54585 65.111.164.187 (15 Apr 2011 06:51:39 GMT) |
| X-Complaints-To | abuse@lacave.net |
| NNTP-Posting-Date | Fri, 15 Apr 2011 06:51:39 +0000 (UTC) |
| In-Reply-To | <470a9e96982d7a927f140193f12c0f64@ruby-forum.com> |
| X-Received-From | This message has been automatically forwarded from the ruby-talk mailing list by a gateway at comp.lang.ruby. If it is SPAM, it did not originate at comp.lang.ruby. Please report the original sender, and not us. Thanks! For more details about this gateway, please visit: http://blog.grayproductions.net/categories/the_gateway |
| X-Mail-Count | 381610 |
| X-Ml-Name | ruby-talk |
| X-Rubymirror | Yes |
| X-Ruby-Talk | <90f821efcacb67d7fe0de170d6979e29@ruby-forum.com> |
| Xref | x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.ruby:2920 |
Show key headers only | View raw
Fearless Fool wrote in post #988777:
> What I was surprised about was the scoping of variables in assignment
> statements. I guess it makes sense. Assume that p is previously
> undefined, then a reference on the RHS to p like this:
>
> p = p + 1
>
> will raise an error. But wrapped inside a lambda, the reference to p is
> deferred, so it all works:
>
> p = lambda { |n| p.call(n-1) if (n > 0) }
>
> As I said, that's the power of a lexical closure.
"The scoping of variables in assignment" is exactly the same in both
cases.
p = p + 1 does not fail because p is undefined. p is defined. Its
value is nil. The error results from NilClass#+ not existing. This has
nothing to do with "the power of the lexical closure".
Local variables are discovered at compile time. p gets defined at the
beginning of the scope, *before* the line "p = p + 1", and it's
assigned the value of nil. Try
p = p.to_i + 1
and observe the non-error. Even better, try
def foo
puts local_variables #=>bar
bar = 99
end
The reference to p inside the lambda is not deferred. At compile-time,
the p inside the lambda is bound to the local variable p, just as the
p on the right-hand side of "p = p + 1" is bound to the local variable
p. There is nothing special going on as a result of the lambda being
present.
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
Back to comp.lang.ruby | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: scope of assignments with lambda Kevin Mahler <kevin.mahler@yahoo.com> - 2011-04-15 01:37 -0500
csiph-web