Let doesn't scare me off too much, as it reminds me of Standard ML.
let x=lambda(f) ==>f+3;
And Basic, funnily enough:
LET X=X=1;
I think if we use Let, then we are starting to look like a language with
the notion of 'environment' as lisp engines call it. In which case the
issue is not so muc
Jose Alberto Fernandez wrote:
From: Jose Alberto Fernandez
From: Dominique Devienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dealing with would be tricky, but I think we
*should* break BC by not allowing the different 'threads' of
a to share properties, at least unless explicitly
requested.
So wh
--- Jose Alberto Fernandez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> This is absolutely valid code today. Shall it stay
> in an infinite wait?
This is where scoping comes in... the
exists in the same scope as the , so
all spawned threads would diverge from a common point:
i.e
> From: Jose Alberto Fernandez
>
> > From: Dominique Devienne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > Dealing with would be tricky, but I think we
> > *should* break BC by not allowing the different 'threads' of
> > a to share properties, at least unless explicitly
> > requested.
> >
>
> So wha
