fixes #100

compiler/semexprs.nim

@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ proc semSym(c: PContext, n: PNode, s: PSym, flags: TExprFlags): PNode =
       result = newSymNode(s, n.info)
   of skMacro: result = semMacroExpr(c, n, s)
   of skTemplate: result = semTemplateExpr(c, n, s)
-  of skVar, skLet, skResult, skParam:
+  of skVar, skLet, skResult, skParam, skForVar:
     markUsed(n, s)
     # if a proc accesses a global variable, it is not side effect free:
     if sfGlobal in s.flags:

compiler/semstmts.nim

@@ -407,6 +407,7 @@ proc semForVars(c: PContext, n: PNode): PNode =
   if iter.kind != tyTuple or length == 3: 
     if length != 3: GlobalError(n.info, errWrongNumberOfVariables)
     var v = newSymS(skForVar, n.sons[0], c)
+    if getCurrOwner().kind == skModule: incl(v.flags, sfGlobal)
     # BUGFIX: don't use `iter` here as that would strip away
     # the ``tyGenericInst``! See ``tests/compile/tgeneric.nim``
     # for an example:
@@ -418,6 +419,7 @@ proc semForVars(c: PContext, n: PNode): PNode =
       GlobalError(n.info, errWrongNumberOfVariables)
     for i in countup(0, length - 3): 
       var v = newSymS(skForVar, n.sons[i], c)
+      if getCurrOwner().kind == skModule: incl(v.flags, sfGlobal)
       v.typ = iter.sons[i]
       n.sons[i] = newSymNode(v)
       addDecl(c, v)

todo.txt

@@ -19,7 +19,8 @@ version 0.9.0
 - implement the high level optimizer
 - change overloading resolution
 - implement proper coroutines
-- implement ``partial`` pragma for partial evaluation
+- implement ``partial`` pragma for partial evaluation; ``hoist`` pragma for
+  loop hoisting
 - we need to support iteration of 2 different data structures in parallel
 - make exceptions compatible with C++ exceptions
 - 'const' objects including case objects
@@ -28,6 +29,12 @@ version 0.9.0
   changes that people want; may turn out to be a bad idea
 - activate more thread tests
 - optimize method dispatchers
+- rethink the syntax: distinction between expr and stmt is unfortunate; 
+  indentation handling is quite complex too; problem with exception handling
+  is that often the scope of ``try`` is wrong and apart from that ``try`` is
+  a full blown statement; a ``try`` expression might be a good idea to make
+  error handling more light-weight
+  people also want ``inc a; inc b``
 
 Bugs
 ----
@@ -168,11 +175,4 @@ Version 2
   a generalized case statement looks like:
     
     case x with `=~`
-      
-- rethink the syntax: distinction between expr and stmt is unfortunate; 
-  indentation handling is quite complex too; problem with exception handling
-  is that often the scope of ``try`` is wrong and apart from that ``try`` is
-  a full blown statement; a ``try`` expression might be a good idea to make
-  error handling more light-weight
-  people also want ``inc a; inc b``