[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: __methcall
- From: Mark Hamburg <mhamburg@...>
- Date: Thu, 04 Nov 2004 17:34:31 -0800
on 11/4/04 4:53 PM, Daniel Silverstone at email@example.com wrote:
> On Thu, 2004-11-04 at 10:26 -0800, Mark Hamburg wrote:
>>> I think the easiest way to answer the questions regarding my patch is to
>>> simply say..
>>> __methcall first, then __index, then the table itself
>> But what about entries in the table itself? Do those trump __methcall?
> I said; completely clearly I think...
> __methcall *first*
> __index *second*
> the table itself *last*
> The patch itself makes this abundantly clear also
I think your patch actually does:
You would want the table to come before __index anyway if you wanted to
preserve Lua's semantics when not using __methcall (or __methindex or