Re: need for LuaLint? (Re: Experience with Large Applications in Lua?)

[Mark Hamburg <mhamburg@...>]

This suggests the need for a library to parse Lua programs into Lua data
structures (and vice-versa though not for this case). That way one could
write the Lua analysis tools in Lua.

Mark

on 7/7/04 5:22 AM, Asko Kauppi at asko.kauppi@sci.fi wrote:

> 
> How about a tool that would collect the suggested function
> 'descriptors' and apply them to all invocations of the functions?
> 
> I'm certainly _not_ going to do such a tool, but .. if someone will.. :)
> 
> That would find often experienced bugs s.a. wrong params to
> 'string.find' (I tend to forget the string itself! :)  and such.
> Basically, a Lint
> (http://computing-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/lint) for Lua.
> 
> -ak
> 
> 
> 7.7.2004 kello 13:53, Jamie Webb kirjoitti:
> 
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 10:50:21AM +0200, Steve Donovan wrote:
>>> In a nutshell: we need strong testing, not strong typing.
>> 
>> The problem I have with this argument is that a static type checker:
>> a) is more reliable
>> b) will tell you exactly where the problem is, rather than throwing up
>> an error at some point later when you try and misuse a value.
>> 
>