[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: RE: Current state of 5.1, and the PS2.
- From: "Jerome Vuarand" <jerome.vuarand@...>
- Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2006 10:14:26 -0500
Since 5.1 modules can expect to be loaded by the require function. And that function do some things that modules relying on 5.1 package model could expect: passing the module name as first parameter and putting the module return value or true in package.loaded[modulename].
I think designing standard libraries just like modules was a good thing. The only thing I don't like about the new package system is that standard libraries, luaL_register and the 'module' function set globals.
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : email@example.com
> [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] De la part de Rici Lake
> Envoyé : 3 novembre 2006 00:21
> À : Lua list
> Objet : Re: Current state of 5.1, and the PS2.
> On 2-Nov-06, at 11:27 PM, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> > But the balance might be different if I was loading more libraries.
> Yeah, I usually have quite a few more than that in any given
> project. I build something a lot like the linit.c file with a
> script that looks for definitions of luaopen_* functions, so
> that I can just use one line to add the project. The script
> is run by make, and it's all a bit kludgy, but it works out
> well for me.
> Adding the package name is probably unnecessary, but I put it
> in anyway in case some module I'm using which someone else
> wrote needs it. I've yet to write a module which does, but a
> lot of mine do use the callframe's function environment.