Re: [SUGGESTION] Some lfs functionality in os library, please!

[Peter Aronoff <telemachus@...>]

Daurnimator <quae@daurnimator.com> wrote:
> As the python community has slowly learned: the standard libraries are
> where functions go to die. see
> http://www.leancrew.com/all-this/2012/04/where-modules-go-to-die/

I often see similar thoughts expressed for Ruby and Perl.

However. Ruby, Perl, and Python are large languages that come with (a lot
of) batteries. They all share a culture of using non-standard libraries.
That is, people make heavy use of CPAN, gems, pip & company. Lua is a tiny
language withot batteries (for the most part, or “with minimal batteries”
if you prefer). It has a culture of “write your own” and “no dependencies”.
So what makes sense for the big trio might not make sense for Lua.

Bottom line: I don’t think problems with other standard libraries are
a knockdown argument against including some (relatively?) basic os-related
functions into Lua’s small stdlib.

P
-- 
We have not been faced with the need to satisfy someone else's
requirements, and for this freedom we are grateful.
    Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System