Why this closure is not #isSimple ???

On 11/06/2015 12:01 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Martin McClure
> <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     On 11/06/2015 11:10 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck via Glass wrote:
>     > Hi,
>     >
>     > '[ :co |
>     >   | d |
>     >   co collect: [  d := 0 ]  ]
>     > ' evaluate isSimple
>     >
>     > Answers false and #_cost answers 2 (complex).
>     > It seems related to the assignment of a temp var (defined inside the
>     > closure... 'd' in my example)  from inside another closure ( [d := 0] in
>     > my example)
>     >
>     > Any idea why? Of course that is a dummy closure that I reduced from my
>     > original one in order to the have the smaller reproducible closure to
>     > illustrate my problem.
>     >
>     > Thanks in advance,
>
>     In 3.2.x, the outer block is not simple because the inner block is not
>     simple. The inner block is not simple because it accesses a variable
>     outside of its own scope.
>
>
> Sure, but I am sending the message to the outer block, not the inner block.
>
>
>     I understand that the outer block's result is somewhat surprising.
>
>
> Yes, I think it should be considered a bug because THAT closure (the one
> I am sending the message) IS SIMPLE. Right?

I don't recall the exact details, but I think that the way blocks in
3.2.x are handled internally, the outer block is actually not simple (in
the way it's handled internally). Blocks are handled differently in 3.3,
so the outer block can be simple, as you'd expect.

Regards,

-Martin