Page 2 of 2
Posted: Sat Apr 07, 2007 5:54 pm
by Demivec
Dummy wrote:Demivec wrote:
A command to "alias" the variable would also be a solution to this scenario.
There's already a solution for your "alias":
Your comments and suggestions about aliasing are valid and helpful, but would seem like they would be better placed in the thread devoted to that topic. I mentioned aliasing in passing only with regard to "limiting variable scoping," the subject of this thread. I mean no disrespect in making this observation. It would seem that you agree that you would define the scope of a variable through a form of aliasing also? Any thoughts regarding ts-soft's idea regarding a range of use encompassing several procedures?
Posted: Sun Apr 08, 2007 2:19 pm
by Dummy
Demivec wrote:Dummy wrote:Demivec wrote:
A command to "alias" the variable would also be a solution to this scenario.
There's already a solution for your "alias":
Your comments and suggestions about aliasing are valid and helpful, but would seem like they would be better placed in the thread devoted to that topic. I mentioned aliasing in passing only with regard to "limiting variable scoping," the subject of this thread. I mean no disrespect in making this observation. It would seem that you agree that you would define the scope of a variable through a form of aliasing also? Any thoughts regarding ts-soft's idea regarding a range of use encompassing several procedures?
To realize scoping without de-/allocating Memory all the time and through that killing the performance the compiler has to do a sort of aliasing with all scoped vars.
And I think instead of killing Fred with new bugs that might occur through that we could ask for a simple Alias command.
The Alias command as shown in my third codesample could have scopes but still leaves the memorymanagement (the force
) on side of the one that writes the code.