Re^2: Closure confusion in Tkx (declarations in loops

> ²) a c-style for is semantically just a while-loop with a prior declaration.

to expand further on this, please see perlsyn#For-Loops

which means

        for (my $i = 1; $i < 10; $i++) {
            ...
        }
[download]

is the same as this:

    {
        my $i = 1;
        while ($i < 10) {
            ...
        } continue {
            $i++;
        }    
    }
[download]

now compare the different effects from an inner declaration ($i) and an outer declaration ($x)

use strict;
use warnings;


# ---------- for c-style

my @cfor;

for ( my $x = 1 ; $x < 4; $x++ ) {
    my $i = $x;
    push @cfor, sub { warn "cfor: \ti=$i \tx=$x" };
}

$_->() for @cfor;


# ---------- while

my @values = 1..3;
my @while;

my $x;
while ( my $i = shift @values ) {
    $x = $i;
    push @while, sub { warn "while: \ti=$i \tx=$x" };
}

$_->() for @while;
[download]

cfor:     i=1     x=4 at d:/exp/pm_closure2.pl line 11.
cfor:     i=2     x=4 at d:/exp/pm_closure2.pl line 11.
cfor:     i=3     x=4 at d:/exp/pm_closure2.pl line 11.
while:     i=1     x=3 at d:/exp/pm_closure2.pl line 25.
while:     i=2     x=3 at d:/exp/pm_closure2.pl line 25.
while:     i=3     x=3 at d:/exp/pm_closure2.pl line 25.
[download]

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)

Wikisyntax for the Monastery
FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice}

Comment on Re^2: Closure confusion in Tkx (declarations in loops - inner vs outer) Select or Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Closure confusion in Tkx (declarations in loops - inner vs outer) by lbrandewie (Acolyte) on Jul 13, 2019 at 20:28 UTC
Thanks Rolf! The code works now but I'm still kinda puzzled as to why the c-style for fails in this case. Is this not a bug in perl? Regards, Lars	[reply]
Re^4: Closure confusion in Tkx (declarations in loops - inner vs outer) by AnomalousMonk (Archbishop) on Jul 13, 2019 at 22:01 UTC
I agree with LanX's explanation here, but here's something I put together that may provide a different viewpoint. In the C-style `for`-loop and in its `while`-loop equivalent in LanX's examples here, a closure is formed (if that's the correct term) over two variables, `$i` and `$x`. The `$i` variable is created anew in each iteration through each loop (there's a `my $i = ...;` within the scope of the loop), but the `$x` variable is created only once (in each example). Therefore, the closures are over three different versions of a variable named `$i`, each of which can have a different value, but only over a single version of a variable named `$x`, which has the value it ends up with at the end of each of the loops. In the Perl-style loop example here, the `for`-loop iterator variable `$i` is successively aliased to three individual values, each of which individually has a closure formed over it and so can reflect those three values independently; you're seeing the alias of `$i` in each case and not the value of `$i`. Or so I think... Update: And no, the way the C-style `for`-loop works in Perl is not a bug; it's the way closures work. Give a man a fish: `<%-{-{-{-<`	[reply] [d/l] [select]
Re^4: Closure confusion in Tkx (declarations in loops - inner vs outer) by LanX (Saint) on Jul 13, 2019 at 21:35 UTC
> as to why the c-style for fails in this case. Think of lexicals in a scope like having a different references each time the scope is passed at runtime. But - like already demonstrated - the first part of the c-style for is outside the block to be implemented as a while. More gory details? A lexical declaration in a scope reserves - at run time - a storage place in memory which is released at the end of scope. No release happens if the ref counter isn't 0, like when the lexical is used in a closure. So if the last lexical was released it might happen that the ref is reused, but it's better to assume they aren't the same variable. `DB<8> for my $x (1..3) { print \$x } SCALAR(0x3450e50)SCALAR(0x3450e50)SCALAR(0x3450e50) DB<9> for my $x (1..2) { print \$x; $a = sub {$x} } SCALAR(0x3459b20)SCALAR(0x3328238)` [download] $x has different refs in line 9 because the first $x is captured in a closure and not relased. Hence Perl can't reuse the reference. HTH! :) Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice}	[reply] [d/l]


go ahead... be a heretic
	PerlMonks

Re^2: Closure confusion in Tkx (declarations in loops - inner vs outer)

More gory details?