Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 5965093
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 22, 20262026-05-22T19:33:02+00:00 2026-05-22T19:33:02+00:00

I know that blocks are created in the stack. However, since I don’t have

  • 0

I know that blocks are created in the stack. However, since I don’t have enough knowledge about stack and local variables, I can not understand why I should move the block to heap in order to have expected result. Intuitively I feel like the block code chunk has only 1 instance in the stack, this code is referencing to local variable i 3 times. If I copy it to heap it will have 3 different instances and each time it will capture 3 different values of i during copy procedure. But I would really like to know more about block code in stack, heap and referencing local variables.

for (int i=0; i<3; i++)
    b[i] = ^{ return i;};
for (int i=0; i<3; i++)
    printf("b %d\n", b[i]());
  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-22T19:33:03+00:00Added an answer on May 22, 2026 at 7:33 pm

    Scopes, man. Scopes.

    Rewrite that as:

    void georgeClinton() {
        int (^b[3])(); // iirc
        // georgeClinton's scope
        for (int i=0; i<3; i++) {
            // for's scope
            b[i] = ^{ return i;};
        }
    }
    

    On every pass through that for() loop, for’s scope is effectively a new scope. But, of course, scopes are on the stack.

    When you call georgeClinton(), you effectively push georgeClinton()’s scope onto the stack. And when georgeClinton() returns with some funky goodness, georgeClinton()’s scope is popped off the stack, leaving the stack in whatever state it was in when the push happened (with a potential modification for the return value).

    A for() loop is the same thing; each iteration pushes state onto the stack and pops it off at the end of the iteration.

    Thus, if you store anything on the stack in an iteration of a for() loop, like a block, that thing will be destroyed at the end of the iteration. To preserve it, you must move it to the heap (where you control the lifespan of the state of any given allocation).

    The key being that a block typed variable is really a pointer; it is a reference to a structure that defines the block. They start on the stack for efficiency and this can lead to subtle issues like this one.

    Note that a block is really two things; it is a reference to the bit of immutable code that implements the block (which is really just like a function pointer) and it is a description of the data captured in the block and how that data is to be moved to the heap when copied.

    That is, a block is the combination of data and code. Code that never changes. Data that is captured as the execution pointer passes over the expression that defines the block (i.e. the block “closes over” the current state of execution).

    It is that latter bit that trips you up; when a block is created on the stack, it is created with slots to hold captured data, also on the stack.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I know that the MsNLB can be configured to user mulitcast with IGMP. However,
I ran into something odd today that maybe someone knows something about. I have
Okay, I have a struct, TextBlock , that simulates moving blocks of text around
I have created a module that works on my Windows XAMPP installation. Testing on
I have an existing application that has some parts of formatted text-blocks (standard formats
I know that I can do something like $int = (int)99; //(int) has a
I know that default cron's behavior is to send normal and error output to
I know that you can insert multiple rows at once, is there a way
I know that |DataDirectory| will resolve to App_Data in an ASP.NET application but is
I know that .NET is JIT compiled to the architecture you are running on

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.