accessing local variables periodically

[ghost]

If indeed it's not possible, then some ways to deal with this includes:

• Allowing the engine to be updated without exposing implementation details of targets, thus allowing timers to be bypassed
• Associating an object with a timer, that is passed to the callback, or turning the callbacks into closures

[yglukhov]

Looks like you wanted to post this elsewhere, because I could not understand a thing.

[ghost]

No, this is the correct repo 😆

What I meant was, is there a way to execute user code periodically, which accesses some state that is not declared globally? The callback passed to timers.setInterval neither takes a parameter nor is it a closure. The first bullet point might be the wrong approach, because I'm not sure how that would translate to browser applications for example.

Does it make sense now?

[yglukhov]

timers.setInterval takes a closure as argument.

var i = 0
setInterval(1.0) do():
  inc i
  echo i

[ghost]

I thought it was necessary to annotate the parameter with the closure pragma. Won't the function where setInterval is invoked go out of scope before the event loop is executed?

[yglukhov]

I thought it was necessary to annotate the parameter with the closure pragma.

Proc args are closures by default.

Won't the function where setInterval is invoked go out of scope before the event loop is executed?

Sorry, but I don't understand the question again. setInterval schedules a timer in runloop. Why would scope matter?

[ghost]

nevermind