Subject: Re: XS: possible to have side effects? From: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 08 Jun 1997 14:38:08 -0400 |
I'd like to withdraw my question submitted moments ago ... I never took the time to read the subject line, so I didn't realize that, indeed, we were discussing the possibility of having side effects. Many apologies for the wasted bandwidth. ............. Ken ======================== withdrawn message ======================== Please pardon my confusion, but I'd like to ask something about this. At 13:34 97/06/08 +0700, you wrote: >given > > (define x (let ((n 0)) (lambda () (set! n (+ 1 n)) n))) > >repeated calls to (x) will return 1, 2, 3,... Then doesn't calling this routine create a side effect? The return value isn't deterministic based on one's location within a grove. This concerns me from a debugging point of view ... I've been under the belief that each construction rule is independent of all other construction rules. Won't the above now introduce variability that isn't repeatable and then, perhaps, difficult to debug? Thanks ............ Ken -- G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com 1605 Mardick Court, Box 266, V: +1(613)489-0999 Kars, Ontario CANADA K0A-2E0 F: +1(613)489-0995 PGP Privacy: http://www.cyberus.ca/~holman/gkholman.pgp DSSSList info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XS: possible to have side effec, G. Ken Holman | Thread | Re: XS: possible to have side effec, James Clark |
Re: XS: possible to have side effec, G. Ken Holman | Date | DSSSL Documentation Project?, Tony Graham |
Month |