Path: news.daimi.aau.dk!olevi
From: olevi@daimi.aau.dk (Ole Villumsen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.beta
Subject: Re: Recursive, double INNER
Date: 17 Feb 1995 12:57:10 GMT
Organization: DAIMI, Computer Science Dept. at Aarhus University
Lines: 33
Message-ID: <3i26f6$88v@belfort.daimi.aau.dk>
References: <ALFH.95Feb6204201@byleist.ifi.uio.no> <3hntel$17j@belfort.daimi.aau.dk> <ALFH.95Feb14132944@byleist.ifi.uio.no>
NNTP-Posting-Host: scandium.daimi.aau.dk

I see what you mean. I think I'd prefer to pass "current" as a parameter
(depending on circumstances):

forAllThings:
  (# before:< (# current: ^someObject; enter current[] do inner; #);
     after:< (# current: ^someObject; enter current[] do inner; #);
     recursiveForAll:
       (# do ... foo[] -> before;
             ... &recursiveForAll; ...
             foo[] -> after; 
       #);
  do &recursiveForAll;
  #);

forAllDingbats: forAllThings
  (# before::< (# do ... current ... #);
     after::< (# do ... #);
  #);

Alf-Ivar Holm <alfh@byleist.ifi.uio.no> writes:

>It does solve the problem, and it looks prettier, but it may introduce
>another complication because of the new block level:

>If there are some variables in forAllThings that is accessible to
>before and after, let us say some "current" pointer that is set before
>"before".  This variable is updated in recursiveForAll, but is
>declared in forAllThings, to make it accessible to before and after.
>Since this is a global variable to recursiveForAll, it have to be
>reset before the "after" call, since some recursive call to
>recursiveForAll have changed current. 
...
>	Affi