Re: Problems with lposix on win32

[Chris Marrin <chris@...>]

Rici Lake wrote:
> On 15-Jan-06, at 6:19 PM, D Burgess wrote:
>
> > I agree with this.
> >
> > On 1/16/06, Edgar Toernig <froese@gmx.de> wrote:
> >
> > > PS: I don't like the name osex.  I'd simply put them into os.
>
>
> I agree with this, too. Loading the extended os package should extend 
> the existing os package, not create a new one. Truly platform specific 
> os interfaces could go in separate packages or subpackages (os.macosx)

In looking at the 5.1 code, it seems that loading the os package goes 
through a different line of code for registry (luaL_register) than an 
external package (ll_module). The code is somewhat different, for 
instance, luaL_register does not put an _NAME propertry in the table. 
Can I therefore do a 'require "os"' and have something reasonable happen?

--
chris marrin              ,""$, "As a general rule,don't solve puzzles
chris@marrin.com        b`    $  that open portals to Hell" ,,.
        ,.`           ,b`    ,`                            , 1$'
     ,|`             mP    ,`                              :$$'     ,mm
   ,b"              b"   ,`            ,mm      m$$    ,m         ,`P$$
  m$`             ,b`  .` ,mm        ,'|$P   ,|"1$`  ,b$P       ,`  :$1
 b$`             ,$: :,`` |$$      ,`   $$` ,|` ,$$,,`"$$     .`    :$|
b$|            _m$`,:`    :$1   ,`     ,$Pm|`    `    :$$,..;"'     |$:
P$b,      _;b$$b$1"       |$$ ,`      ,$$"             ``'          $$
 ```"```'"    `"`         `""`        ""`                          ,P`