Re: changes in 'require'

[Roberto Ierusalimschy <roberto@...>]

> What is not possible to do is to load just the core, not the sugar
> that init.lua adds to it. Under the new scheme, init.lua will *always*
> be called.

On second thoughts, maybe this is a good argument not to load parent
modules automatically. (To ignore errors does not help here, and to make
modules aware of why they are being called will only make things much
more complex than they already are...)

Mike said this makes his life easier. Why?

Maybe we should go back to the original scheme and look for another
solution to the single DLL problem?

-- Roberto