Re: Not the 'global' debate again! (was Re: Activation frame problem)

[Doug Rogers <rogers@...>]

On Friday 02 April 2004 09:09, RLake@oxfam.org.pe wrote:
> Doug Rogers escribió:
> > I will be happy when the 'global' keyword becomes the one-and-only
> > way to make something global! ;)
> Will you? You would be happy having to put:
>   global string, math, io, table, ...
>   global type, tonumber, tostring, ...

That's why I added the wink - ;)  Sorry for the confusion.

You are correct. It would be worse that way.

> It seems too Perl-y or something.

And, quite seriously this time, I despise the look of Perl. It's uglier than 
Python, even, if you can imagine that. Lua is far more beautiful than either.

Now if only the the creators had 16 fingers instead of 10, then they'd be 
hexadecimal fanatics like I am and we'd have 0xC0DE support for hex! ;) I'm 
quite happy with patching it each time, so please note the wink.

No, I don't have 16 fingers, but I can count to 1024 on the 10 that I do have! 
Neal Stephenson has shattered my dreams of dazzling others with my binary 
finger-counting, though. A main character in his novel _Quicksilver_ uses 
binary finger-counting in the 17th century. Hint to newbies: use your pinky 
(little) finger for the lsb of each hand.

> There is a pre-release of my Lua colouriser at 
> <http://lua-users.org/files/wiki_insecure/users/rici/parser.tgz>; 

That looks pretty. Keep up the good work!

Doug Rogers