Closed TheLoneWolfling closed 8 years ago
Hmm, that's a tricky one. My instinct is to have print return undefined, but I will think about this one a little longer before I make that change. It may be nice, in some cases, to pass values through.
OK print returns undefined now, I think that's the most intuitive solution.
Currently, "(print (print 0))", for instance, isn't actually well-defined, as print doesn't actually initialize result.type.
This can be fixed by adding "result.type = 'u';" at line 101 of the execute section.
This does mean that "print" explicitly returns "undefined". I don't know what you want print to return. It might be that having print return the value printed would be better, for instance.