Talk:Variable declaration reset: Difference between revisions
(→Meaning of purpose: new section) |
Thundergnat (talk | contribs) m (→Meaning of purpose: comment) |
||
Line 14:
Is there a language where a variable declaration inside the body of a loop does *not* reset the contents on every iteration? What would the alternative be like? --[[User:Spoon!|Spoon!]] ([[User talk:Spoon!|talk]]) 07:17, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
:: <blockquote>Is there a language where a variable declaration inside the body of a loop does *not* reset the contents on every iteration?</blockquote>
:: Yes?
::<blockquote>What would the alternative be like?</blockquote>
:: The possible alternatives might be:
::* 1) It does reset every time.
::* 2) It doesn't reset every time.
:: or possibly...
::* 3) It does or doesn't reset depending on other factors. (see the Raku entry, for example)
::--[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 10:40, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
|
Revision as of 10:41, 21 June 2022
i>1
(minor point) I think I may have sold you all a bit of a dummy with Phix's i>1, which is correct because of it's 1-based indexes, and the JavaScript typo of i>1 which should have been/is now i>0, but luckily it should make no difference. I also wonder if algol68 should be i>LWB s ?? --Pete Lomax (talk) 02:07, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
- God point, Pete - I've adjusted the code and added a bit more explanation. --Tigerofdarkness (talk) 13:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe a bit late now but you could make it lower-bound independent if it was curr>1 instead of i>1 - the effect would be the same. --Tigerofdarkness (talk) 11:13, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, that would be(/have been) fine too. I also realised far too late that I should have asked for the values instead of the indexes, so we'd get consistent results across 0-based and 1-based indexes... Nevermind. --Pete Lomax (talk) 13:27, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
Meaning of purpose
I am having trouble understanding the meaning of the purpose of the task:
The purpose is to determine whether variable declaration (in block scope) resets the contents on every iteration.
Is there a language where a variable declaration inside the body of a loop does *not* reset the contents on every iteration? What would the alternative be like? --Spoon! (talk) 07:17, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Is there a language where a variable declaration inside the body of a loop does *not* reset the contents on every iteration?
- Yes?
What would the alternative be like?
- The possible alternatives might be:
- 1) It does reset every time.
- 2) It doesn't reset every time.
- or possibly...
- 3) It does or doesn't reset depending on other factors. (see the Raku entry, for example)
- --Thundergnat (talk) 10:40, 21 June 2022 (UTC)