Yurii Rashkovskii
Yurii Rashkovskii
Additional thought: at least in the current implementation, juggling values on the stack is somewhat more efficient in terms of allocations required. Values moving around stack aren't allocated, just referenced....
An important downside of this feature: one won't be able to retrieve a bunch of definitions from the storage and EVAL them to define a number of words
PR has been updated to reduce the scope and implement a new word called `EVAL/SCOPED`
Gated feature merged
While playing further with it, I discovered one more edge case that's not great about it. Let me think about it a bit more. Basically, there's a situation when we...
What can we do about this? 1. Keep at as is, but if you know you're passing a closure into a word that has its own scope, check if you...
I think have a decent solution for this. Just like we have EVAL that evaluates in the curren scope, EVAL/SCOPED evaluated in a new scope, we should have EVAL/UNSCOPED that...
I am still not 100% happy with EVAL/UNSCOPED as this would require a ceremony to pass closure by names. I am leaning towards stating that the only safe way to...
Current idea: enable `unwrapping syntax` for the text form: ``` [1 `closure] => [1] closure CONCAT [] CONCAT ```
#108 would resolve this issue