Re: Back & Forth - Co-routines

In article <vnq10p$162l3$1@dont-email.me>,
Ruvim  <ruvim.pinka@gmail.com> wrote:

On 2025-02-02 15:13, albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl wrote:
>
>
Recursion is not necessary. It is enough to use the same-name "local"
variables in different functions, some of which throw exceptions, and
other catch exceptions.
>
An artificial example:
>
>
: local ( x2 addr1 -- ; R: nest-sys1 -- x1 addr1 nest-sys.xt nest-sys1 )
  \ This definition assumes that nest-sys size is 1 cell,
  \ and xt is a subtype of nest-sys
  r>  ( x2 addr nest-sys1 )
  over dup @ >r >r  [: 2r> ! ;] >r
  ( x2 addr1  nest-sys1 ) >r  !
;
>
>
: idiv ( n1 n2\0 -- n3  |  n1 0 -- never )
  dup if / exit then -10 throw
;
>
variable a
variable b
>
: foo ( n1 n2 -- )
  b local  a local
  a @  b @  idiv
  ."  idiv result is " . cr
;
: bar ( u1 -- u1 )
  a local
  100  a @  ['] foo catch if 2drop then
  a @
;
>
0 bar .
\ this must print 0, but will print 10
>

You share the same global storage for local's in different
words.
Try this with naming the local in bar `` c ''.

I maintain that if you are not in a recursive call for
a function with locals, and you try to catch the same function
call, everything is fine.
The challenge I posed remains, find a realistic scenarion that
leads to problems.

Groetjes Albrt

--
Ruvim

--
Temu exploits Christians: (Disclaimer, only 10 apostles)
Last Supper Acrylic Suncatcher - 15Cm Round Stained Glass- Style Wall
Art For Home, Office And Garden Decor - Perfect For Windows, Bars,
And Gifts For Friends Family And Colleagues.