Fellow ChucKists,
consider;
----------------------------
int foo @=> int bar;
//yields semi-random high number
<<<bar>>>;
-----------------------
and;
-----------------------
1 => int foo @=> int bar;
//yields "1"
<<<bar>>>;
2 => foo;
//yields "1"
<<<bar>>>;
------------------------------
Integers seem to be in some sort of state of doubt between being assignable and not being assignable (maybe also in doubt about being a object? the poor things!).
This becomes somewhat important if bar is a member of a class that -for it's member functions- would benefit from knowing what happens around it. I can still turn both foo and bar into length 1 arrays or keep passing foo as a argument to such functions but that's not as pretty.
Yours,
Kas.
PS for those who hadn't seen this yet; length 1 arrays to trick integers into becoming full objects was cooked up by Frostburn here;
http://electro-music.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23628
Maybe inspired by this strategy to turn functions into objects (in a roundabout way);
http://electro-music.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=23546
Tricky but useful.