From: MonkeeSage <MonkeeSage@...>
Date: 2007-12-08T22:15:00+09:00
Subject: Re: Dynamic local vars

On Dec 8, 5:01 am, Robert Klemme <shortcut...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 07.12.2007 16:48, MonkeeSage wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 7, 8:33 am, Tim Hunter <rmag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Jordan Callicoat wrote:
>
> >>> Not so much like a C macro, but more like a C struct...you could...use
> >>> a Struct ;)
> >>> V = Struct.new(:x, :y).new(nil, nil)
> >>> def bar
> >>>   V.x = 10
> >>>   V.y = 20
> >>> end
> >>> def foo
> >>>   bar
> >>>   puts V.x, V.y
> >>> end
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Jordan
> >> Of course the Struct is not actually allowing him to share data between
> >> bar and foo. It's the global constant V that's doing that.
> >> --
> >> Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.
>
> > Yeah. I thought it fit the desired behavior though, since it shortened
> > the call to bar (as per desired behavior) and only adds four more
> > chars ("V." twice) over the original example.
>
> Global variables are considered harmful for a reason.  Sometimes more
> explicitness is better.  I.e. in this case I'd rather use multiple
> returns or - more likely - instance variables.  But since I know nothing
> about the algorithm I cannot make a recommendation here.  I'd just
> generally suggest to look at command pattern.
>
> Kind regards
>
>         robert

Yeah, yeah...but it still fit (what was given) of the spec. :P

Regards,
Jordan