[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Globals (more ruminations)
- From: Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo <lhf@...>
- Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 10:04:38 -0300
> There is also a compatibility problem for the "global function foo ...
> end" syntax. This code would no longer work as expected:
>
> local foo;
> function foo () end
>
> (The local foo would be a function in 5.1 and nil in 5.2.)
No. foo is resolved lexically as local in both cases.
- References:
- Re: Globals (more ruminations), Mark Hamburg
- Re: Globals (more ruminations), Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: Globals (more ruminations), Geoff Leyland
- Re: Globals (more ruminations), Alexander Gladysh
- Re: Globals (more ruminations), Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: Globals (more ruminations), Juri Munkki
- Re: Globals (more ruminations), Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: Globals (more ruminations), Patrick Donnelly
- Re: Globals (more ruminations), Jim Whitehead II
- Re: Globals (more ruminations), Patrick Donnelly