Patch+patch+patch=>lua 5.2? was Default value in function parameters?

["Grellier, Thierry" <t-grellier@...>]

Well, I know we can patch, and I'll do it when really necessary. But
- I'm not sure of the merge of all patches
- it isn't that easy convincing management that using lua is worth the
maintenance overhead compared to other scripts languages. 
- this reduces chances of using LuaJIT if it appears that it would help.
- more generally this reduces chances to use any third part tool
(debugger, lint, swig, tolua, whatever) which already are weak enough...

This change is minor, because there are ways to obtain the behavior. I
have yet a major patch in Lua already to support overloadable bitwise
operators. 
I've exposed the patch in the list. I've understood that not every body
would like to have this support, so this can be disabled/enabled within
lua_conf.h on demand (but with byte code incompatibility). Thus
including changes like can be almost not sensitive.

Then I just wonder what would be the latency to integrate patches into
reference implementation. That is the absence of roadmap and evolution
procedure doesn't give much visibility on language, which is a drawback.

-----Original Message-----
From: lua-bounces@bazar2.conectiva.com.br
[mailto:lua-bounces@bazar2.conectiva.com.br] On Behalf Of Andreas
Stenius
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 1:11 PM
To: Lua list
Subject: Re: Default value in function parameters?

Grellier, Thierry skrev:
[...]
> I'm however thinking of a syntax sugar like that:

Token Filters are experts on syntax sugar!
It's a few lines of quite trivial code to acheive what you ask for.
The drawback? it requires a patched lua.