Re: get_local() and "(for index/limit/stop)"

[David Given <dg@...>]

Rici Lake wrote:
[...]
> In any event, the compiler should not need clues like this. It is easy 
> enough to tell if the value of a local variable is not going to be used, 
> regardless of its name. That is usually a programming error, of course: 
> my Lua linter has a specific hook in it to avoid flagging unused local 
> _'s in order to allow this idiom.

Sure, but the important is not to make life easier for the compiler, but to 
make life easier for the programmer. Why should I have to allocate a new 
variable, which means coming up with a name that doesn't conflict with any 
other names in my block, just to put a return parameter in that I'm not going 
to use? Far better to have syntax that says explicitly that I'm not going to 
use it. The _ idiom does *part* of this, but it can occasionally trip you up 
because it doesn't do what you expect it to do.

--
[insert interesting .sig here]