Re: a new proposal for environments

[David Given <dg@...>]

On 2010-02-25 13:51, Jim Whitehead II wrote:
[...]
> Indeed, and you'd have the power to do either!

It's always a good sign when you can remove a feature *and make the 
language more powerful at the same time*. I like this.

With regard to _G vs _ENV: my understanding is that _G is the 
conventional name for the outermost environment, right? And normally 
_ENV == _G, except when explicitly overridden?

Is this a useful distinction to keep? After all, overriding the 
environment is effectively replacing the global table for a chunk of code...

--
┌─── ｄｇ＠ｃｏｗｌａｒｋ．ｃｏｍ ───── http://www.cowlark.com ─────
│
│ life←{ ↑1 ⍵∨.^3 4=+/,¯1 0 1∘.⊖¯1 0 1∘.⌽⊂⍵ }
│ --- Conway's Game Of Life, in one line of APL