From a1a38a5cfaede25b7e6299cac3275e1ccfd9b2db Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jim Pryor Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 07:47:07 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] week9 reference tweak Signed-off-by: Jim Pryor --- week9.mdwn | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/week9.mdwn b/week9.mdwn index 721dde59..76ba7ad6 100644 --- a/week9.mdwn +++ b/week9.mdwn @@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ If however you called `factory` twice, you'd have different `getter`/`setter` pa Here, the call to `setter` only mutated the reference cell associated with the `getter`/`setter` pair. The reference cell associated with `getter'` hasn't changed, and so `getter' ()` will still evaluate to 1. -If you've got a copy of *The Seasoned Schemer*, which we recommended for the seminar, see the discussion at pp. 91-117 and 127-137. +If you've got a copy of *The Seasoned Schemer*, which we recommended for the seminar, see the discussion at pp. 91-118 and 127-137. Notice in these fragments that once we return from inside the call to `factory`, the `free_var` mutable variable is no longer accessible, except through the helper functions `getter` and `setter` that we've provided. This is another way in which a thunk like `getter` can be useful: it still has access to the `free_var` reference cell that was created when it was, because its free variables are interpreted relative to the context in which `getter` was built, even if that context is otherwise no longer accessible. What `getter ()` evaluates to, however, will very much depend on *when* we evaluate it---in particular, it will depend on which calls to the corresponding `setter` were evaluated first. -- 2.11.0