Re: Why not Just PHP-stupid include?

["Patrick Mc(avery" <patrick@...>]

{ snip }
> Both things are not totally unrelated, unfortunately.  Lua has proper
> lexical scoping, and each file ends up in its own chunk.  So when you
> write
>
>      local x = 1
>
> in one file, it only affects that scope.  It works as expected if you
> drop the "local".
>
> I think it will be possible in Lua 5.2 to use the "debug" library
> ("upvaluejoin" in particular) to obtain the effect you desire.
> I'm not sure if that's a good idea, though.
Thanks Florian

That's a good point about local, in another file it means local to that 
file.

List,

This problem with sharing code seems very complex and I am sure due to 
the fact that it must include C modules too it is not easy at all.

Having said this the language is billed as being suitable for 
non-programmers. Please see page 156 of PIL:

""typically developed by one or a few programmers or even by 
non-programmers""

Since this is the case I think mechanisms for non-programmers should be 
of high importance. Module/require/dofile are very subtle and confusing, 
PHP-dumb include is not.

All language features do not have to be used by all, why not just add a 
php-dumb-include that overrides local, as in local to that file for 
non-programmers and bill the other mechanisms as to be used by advanced 
users?