My proposal is to change the semantics to instead be shallow-copying,
which means that atomic values are copied, but aggregate values
(tables, records, and vectors) are shared. With this change, the
above code would print `3`. However, this code would still print `5`:
I for one don’t really like this; in my opinion, atomic values and
aggregate types should behave the same. Everything else feels at least
unintuitive to me.
I also agree with Christian that, given the choice between a deep copy
and the current functionality, I like the current functionality more.
Though I would still prefer deep copies to having different behavior for
aggregate/nonaggregate types.
Johanna
_______________________________________________
zeek-dev mailing list -- zeek-dev@lists.zeek.org
To unsubscribe send an email to zeek-dev-le...@lists.zeek.org
