Re: [RFD] Unified Methods

["John Belmonte" <jvb@...>]

If you have any code examples making use of this patch, it would be
interesting to see them.

If a change can at the same time simplify the API or standard function set,
make programs more terse or easier to maintain, and run at the same speed
then all that's left is the compatibility argument.

My view on compatibility is this:  for a language such as Lua where the
interpreter is embedded into your app and the entire library is ANSI C,
backwards compatibility is not very important.  If I embed Lua 3.2 into my
app and release it, obviously that version of Lua was sufficient for the
requirements of my app.  Even if Lua 4.0, 10.0, etc. have totally different
language syntax or API it doesn't affect my app which could continue using
3.2 indefinitely.  This is quite different from a language like C where any
tiny language change could prevent me from compiling my source for
architecture XXX ten years down the road.

If I understand the situation at Tecgraf, it requires a more conservative
approach to Lua's development as there are two large projects using (and
hence funding) Lua.  Those projects by definition must use each new version
of Lua, creating pressure for backwards compatibility.  It's a situation
with both good and bad aspects... clearly without it Lua may not have
progressed far or even have come into existence.

Any other opinions on this?


-John


----- Original Message -----
From: "Edgar Toernig" <froese@gmx.de>
To: "Multiple recipients of list" <lua-l@tecgraf.puc-rio.br>
Sent: Sunday, October 08, 2000 8:54 AM
Subject: Re: [RFD] Unified Methods


> Hi,
>
> after this really hot discussion I made a first version of Lua
> with unified methods.  If anybody is interested a patch is at
> http://user.exit.de/froese/lua/lua-4b-um1.patch