Re: Tables without commas

[Pedro Miller Rabinovitch <pedro@...>]

> This is how it is in Sol (a derivation of Lua), the ',' in the record
> field constructor is optional.  The only place where it _is_ required
> is before a [key]=val field ({ a=b , [foo]=2 }).  Without the ','
> you'd get a=b[foo]=2 and that will raise a syntax error.

Sure thing.

>  > The only thing people should look out for is stuff like:
>  >         a = { strlen "aaa" }
> You get much more problems.  Sol requires the ',' in list field parts.

Correct. It's a nice approach, I guess -- originally I really only 
intended the optional comma behaviour for recfields.

> I.e. what's the result of { 1 -2 } or { a (b+c)*d }?  (Btw, in Sol your
> two examples above would create exactly the same code - it calls strlen
> for "aaa" and would give a[1]=3 (not 4!) ;-)  IMO the ',' is necessary
> in the list fields.

strlen"aaa" == 4 ?? Doh. My old example had 4 'a's. Please ignore. :-)

I suppose the recfield part is pretty useful. I'll probably keep the 
patch around for my not-Lua language interpreter.

Thanks for the tips -- that's exactly the kind of help/critique I was 
expecting when I posted.

	Pedro.
--
Pedro Miller Rabinovitch
Gerente Geral de Tecnologia
Cipher Technology
www.cipher.com.br