From: Chad Perrin <perrin@...>
Date: 2006-08-02T05:12:16+09:00
Subject: Re: I thought this was the one that worked?

On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 05:07:26AM +0900, Logan Capaldo wrote:
> 
> On Aug 1, 2006, at 3:56 PM, Chad Perrin wrote:
> 
> >On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 11:00:12PM +0900, Just Another Victim of  
> >the Ambient Morality wrote:
> >>
> >>a = 1
> >>def x
> >>    puts a
> >>end
> >>
> >>def y
> >>    x
> >>end
> >>
> >>
> >>    Then x _will_ be a closure but, then again, we already knew  
> >>this...
> >
> >If that's the case, then *everything else* is a closure too, because
> >everything else has access to a -- at least where lexical or global
> >scope exists.
> 
> Actually no one has access to a because it is a local variable.
> 
> Look all blocks close over at _least_ self. If a block contains a  
> call to any receiverless method it is a closure even by your rigid  
> definition.

The "a" to which I referred was the "a" that existed at "a = 1".

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
unix virus: If you're using a unixlike OS, please forward
this to 20 others and erase your system partition.