RE: get_local() and "(for index/limit/stop)"

["Tom Spilman" <tom@...>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lua-bounces@bazar2.conectiva.com.br 
> [mailto:lua-bounces@bazar2.conectiva.com.br] On Behalf Of 
> Fabio Mascarenhas
> Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 5:28 PM
> To: Lua list
> Subject: Re: get_local() and "(for index/limit/stop)"

> "x" is not deleted and reallocated, check the OP_FORLOOP 
> implementation in lvm.c. :-)

 Maybe I interpreted the behavior wrong then.  When I step thru a for loop I
only get "x" while inside the loop.  Specifically on each pass thru the loop
when it steps back to the for line the "x" is no longer returned by
get_local().  If "x" isn't deleted and there isn't some scoping issue I'm
not seeing then get_local() is wrong in this case.

> What Lua version are you using?

 I'm using the first "5.1 (work)" release from a few months ago.  Maybe this
is a change in 5.1?

> Lua 5.0.2 shows no "(for index)" local while debugging, and 
> shows the loop index does show up as a local in the line of 
> the for statement. Same for Lua 5.0. The Lua compiler does 
> not even generate "(for index)" as a local.

 Well this doesn't seem to be the case for a script executed within the "5.1
(work)" version of Lua.exe.

 Looking thru the source in lparser.c fornum() does this...

  new_localvarliteral(ls, "(for index)", 0);
  new_localvarliteral(ls, "(for limit)", 1);
  new_localvarliteral(ls, "(for step)", 2);
  new_localvar(ls, varname, 3);

 So it seems they made an explicit decision to not name "(for index)" with
the real index name.  It would be nice if this was corrected so I can
clearly tell which nested loop these automatic for locals correspond to.

  Tom Spilman
  Co-owner | Programmer
  www.sickheadgames.com