Re: compile-time globals

[Thomas Lauer <thomas.lauer@...>]

Fabien <fleutot+lua@gmail.com> wrote:

> Adding static type-checking to a language not designed for it is bound to
> failure; the best one can do is type a toy subset of the core language, and
> no usable subset of the standard libs.

I am not really after static type-checking as such (one of the great
features of Lua being its highly dynamical nature). I just want a flag
whether a global variable is legitimate or not.

> The current trend, to address that, is to shift more bug detection from
> static analysis to better testing; but I'd bet that on the long term,
> lint-like tools, which don't pretend to be exhaustive/sound and therefore
> can't be called type systems, but can "take risks" and use heuristics, are
> going to largely supersede traditional type-checking.

I agree. Such a tool, even if based on heuristics and perhaps not 100%
perfect -- but 99.53% ;-) --, will still be a great help in
bug-squashing.

-- 
cheers  thomasl

web : http://thomaslauer.com/start