Richard,
Question from someone still fairly new to Smalltalk:
To implement the example you gave regarding mutually recursive functions in
Lua, one must write something like this:
local f, g
function g ()
<do something>
f()
<do something>
end
function f ()
<do something>
g()
<do something>
end
where the initial declaration of f & g as locals defines an f such that g
will see it (as a local, albeit containing nil) when g is defined. The
following definition of f doesn't require this, of course. And g doesn't
care what f contains -- until execution time.
Both Lua and Smalltalk implement full lexical closures, so it begs the
question: Do the blocks defined in your example have this same issue? What
is 'g' in the block assigned to f?
Is it required that 'g' be lexically defined prior to referencing it in a
block closure, or does Smalltalk have a mechanism to resolve this at
execution time?
Thanks,
-Ted
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
