From: "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>
Date: 2003-08-21T04:05:38+09:00
Subject: Re: for/in loop

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kurt M. Dresner" <kdresner@cs.utexas.edu>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: for/in loop


> What do you mean by it would work?  The first one will raise a
> NameError, or the second one will output 3 ?

I think it's a minor problem with Matz's English. I believe he
means "it will work when the new scoping rule is introduced" or
"it would work, if the new scoping rule were already in place."

Hal


> -Kurt
>
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2003 at 01:56:44AM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > In message "Re: for/in loop"
> >     on 03/08/21, Paul Brannan <pbrannan@atdesk.com> writes:
> >
> > |It's definitely not pointless:
> > |
> > |  for i in [1, 2, 3]
> > |    x = i
> > |  end
> > |  p x #=> 3
> > |
> > |  [1, 2, 3].each do
> > |    y = i
> > |  end
> > |  p y #=> test.rb:9: undefined local variable or method `y' for
#<Object:0x40289ce0> (NameError)
> >
> > Yes, but it would work, when new scoping rule is introduced.
> >
> > matz.
> >
> >======= End of Original Message =======<
>