Re: Assignment Question
On 25 Feb 2005, at 10:51, Robert Craig wrote:
>
>
> posted by: Robert Craig <rds at RapidEuphoria.com>
>
> Mario Steele wrote:
> > So, Rob, you stated before, that it's not documented the exact behavior of
> > the
> > interpreter, when you add something to a global sequence, from another
> > routine, we just experimented, and it worked that way. Well, it worked that
> > way, because it's an expression, and the interpreter knew that. It knew it
> > needed to evaluate the expression first, before Type Checking the data, and
> > finally assigning the data to the variable. The only difference now, is the
> > fact that instead of us pulling the rug out from under you, you've pulled
> > the
> > rug out from under us. I guess my question is now, since this "feature" was
> > implemented, are we to expect that the way the rest of the assignments are
> > done, are going to change as well?
>
> Nothing has changed, except in the weird case where you are
> trying to modify a variable through assignment, while,
> *in the same statement* you are also trying to modify it
> through the side-effect of a function call. In fact,
> it's only when there are two or more subscripts on the LHS
> that there's a change.
Ok, everyone, remember (and tell all the newbies from now on), with 2 or
more subscripts on the LHS, there's a problem, and it's not a bug!
Kat
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
