Re: Modified Interpreter
Hello Pete,
----------
> On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 13:48:14 +0400, Igor Kachan <kinz at peterlink.ru>
> wrote:
>
> >So, there is no problem with any transformations of this code.
>
> Good. Try this (on either standard Eu 2.4 or Matts):
>
> a.e:
> global integer z
> z=1
> include b.e as b
> include c.e as c
> include z.e as d
> ?{z,b:z,c:z,d:z}
>
> b.e:
> global integer z
> z=2
> include a.e as a
> include c.e as c
> include z.e as d
> ?{a:z,z,c:z,d:z}
>
> c.e:
> global integer z
> z=3
> include a.e as a
> include b.e as b
> include z.e as d
> ?{a:z,b:z,z,d:z}
>
> z.e:
> global integer z
> z=4
> include a.e as a
> include b.e as b
> include c.e as c
> ?{a:z,b:z,c:z,z}
>
> As expected (well, actually, I wasn't too sure about re-including the
> calling program, but I am now) this gives no errors and prints:
>
> {1,2,3,4}
> {1,2,3,4}
> {1,2,3,4}
> {1,2,3,4}
>
> Cool, huh?
Cool, yes, but I wonder why my proggy
prints:
1
2
3
and what z=3, of my a.e, of my b.e or of my c.e
> Regards,
> Pete
> PS I really quite like this example, you
> can run any of a.e, b.e, c.e,
> or z.e and get exactly the same result !
I love your example too, I'll run it and kiss it tonight,
but I still wonder why my proggy prints:
1
2
3
and what ....
Regards,
Igor Kachan
kinz at peterlink.ru
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|