«

Stephan Titard schreef:
> Tad McClellan:
>> David Combs:

>>> "Dynamic scoping" -- nice terminology.
>>>
>>> Larry, of course, has chosen the seemingly opposite-meaning
>>> term "local" for the concept in perl.
>>
>> The biggest cause of the local() confusion is that "local" is short
>> for something, and most folks fillin the wrong something.
>> local() makes a "local value", not a "local variable".
>
> yes. Around here I tell people it is short for "localize"

In Perl6 it is renamed to "temp" (and also see "let").
http://dev.perl.org/perl6/doc/design/syn/S04.html

--
Affijn, Ruud

"Gewoon is een tijger."

Dr.Ruud <rvtol+> wrote in comp.lang.perl.misc:
> Stephan Titard schreef:

[local()]

> In Perl6 it is renamed to "temp" (and also see "let").

A very good choice. Dynamic binding is best described in temporal
terms: the value is valid *until* control leaves the block. Lexical
scope is described in spatial terms: the variable is only accessible
*inside* the block. In that view, "my" ought to be called "local",
but even Perl6 won't go that far.

Anno

Stephan Titard <> wrote:
> Tad McClellan escribió:
>> David Combs <> wrote:
>>
>>> "Dynamic scoping" -- nice terminology.
>>
>>> Larry, of course, has chosen the seemingly opposite-meaning
>>> term "local" for the concept in perl.
>>
>>
>> The biggest cause of the local() confusion is that "local" is short
>> for something, and most folks fillin the wrong something.
>>
>> local() makes a "local value", not a "local variable".
>>
>>
> yes. Around here I tell people it is short for "localize"


I tell them it is short for "save and restore".


--
Tad McClellan SGML consulting
Perl programming
Fort Worth, Texas