lua-l archive

Search lua-l

This index contains 143,604 documents and 1,774,497 keywords. Last update on 2023-03-08 .

181. Re: question on the patch FastString (score: 17)

Author: Philippe Verdy <verdyp@...>

Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 19:55:21 +0200

Also someone in this list suggested a possibly better prime (not Mersenne) than 0xAAAB, which was just selected by a small manual incremental search with some properties. As the list of all 16-bit pr

182. Re: question on ipairs (score: 17)

Author: Coda Highland <chighland@...>

Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 12:36:58 -0500

Some of us greatly disagree with this position - in particular, it seriously impacts what you can do with userdatas. For example, if embedding into an environment (e.g. a database) which has a nativ

183. Re: [mildly OT] Some info about Python (score: 17)

Author: ????????? <aga.chatzimanikas@...>

Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 21:53:38 +0200

- do not allow syntax ambiguities, possibly introduce by default the semicolon to denote the end of an expression, or find another way anyway, but do not permit more than one expression in the row or

184. Re: From Lua to Python? (score: 17)

Author: Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@...>

Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2017 14:39:56 +0200

2017-07-15 14:01 GMT+02:00 Dibyendu Majumdar <mobile@majumdar.org.uk>: I don't miss arrays at all. Lua does a good job. What I do miss are tuples, i.e. constant arrays (not the same as Lua tuples). I

185. Re: table.len (score: 17)

Author: Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@...>

Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 07:21:37 +0200

2016-08-06 22:21 GMT+02:00 Soni L. <fakedme@gmail.com>: See 4.a in the summary below. We have had several threads [1-5] that started wherever and wound up in some kind of discussion on __len and the

186. Re: 'table' as fallback for tables (score: 17)

Author: Thomas Jericke <tjericke@...>

Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 08:23:24 +0200

2 and 2. The largest implicit key. As I said, this is the *least* surprising, not that it has no surprises at all. Huh. And what length of sequence should be after local t = {1, [2]=2, 2} table.remo

187. Re: 'table' as fallback for tables (score: 17)

Author: Philipp Janda <siffiejoe@...>

Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 06:25:57 +0200

Am 01.07.2016 um 13:30 schröbte Martin: 2 and 2. The largest implicit key. As I said, this is the *least* surprising, not that it has no surprises at all. Huh. And what length of sequence should be a

188. Re: 'table' as fallback for tables (score: 17)

Author: Eric Man <meric.au@...>

Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 11:24:58 +1000

Huh. And what length of sequence should be after local t = {1, [2]=2, 2} table.remove(t, 2) --print(t[2]) ? I think, better approach is to explicitly separate array part from hash part. But then we

189. Re: 'table' as fallback for tables (score: 17)

Author: Martin <eden_martin_fuhrspam@...>

Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 04:30:44 -0700

Huh. And what length of sequence should be after local t = {1, [2]=2, 2} table.remove(t, 2) --print(t[2]) ? I think, better approach is to explicitly separate array part from hash part. But then we n

190. Re: Drawing the line between speed and simplicity/elegance (score: 17)

Author: Tim Hill <drtimhill@...>

Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 19:44:33 -0700

On May 7, 2015, at 2:18 PM, Brigham Toskin <brighamtoskin@gmail.com> wrote: So you're right, it's not thousands of times slower. It is slower by an order of magnitude though, which could be non-trivi