[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Redefining locals
- From: Mark Hamburg <mhamburg@...>
- Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:23:08 -0800
Okay. "_" is a good example. I'm not as squeamish about treating it as a
special case, however, if it's the primary reason to use the facility.
If one still allowed hiding in nested scopes, then I think the other uses
could be covered at the expense of having to introduce explicit do blocks.
on 11/11/04 9:46 AM, Rici Lake at firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> On 11-Nov-04, at 11:54 AM, Mark Hamburg wrote:
>> Is it useful to be able
>> to capture a variable and then create a new variable with the same
>> name in
>> what appears to be the same scope?
> My most common use of the idiom is the following:
> local _, _, capture = string.find(str, pattern)
> If you couldn't use nested local's, this would be illegal (and most of
> my code would break).
> Special casing _ strikes me as not a good idea, but perhaps some would
> like that.