Re: Re[4]: require ignores setglobals()

["Peter Hill" <corwin@...>]

Peter Prade:
> Maybe even the name of "global variables" is a bit misleading now,
> considering that each function may have its own table for them. (Of course
> in the most cases, there will still be only one global table.)

Misleading indeed! In fact 'locals' can now end up being more global than
'globals'!

For example:
  local x
  function f() x = 1 end
  function g() x = y end
  function h() return x end
  glob = {y = 123}
  setglobals(g,glob)


Here 'x' has scope throughout the whole file, while the global 'y' only has
scope inside 'g()'!

Perhaps the name "global" really doesn't apply now. :-(

*cheers*
Peter Hill.