Re: syntax

["Mark Meijer" <meijer78@...>]

On 20/02/2008, Javier Guerra <javier@guerrag.com> wrote:
> On 2/20/08, Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl> wrote:
> >  but since the reference states that
> >
> >         a.name as syntactic sugar for a["name"]
> >
> >  i'd expect the parser to recognize such cases; isn't this tricky with
> >  repect to future extensions (read: new keywords) being used in scripts
> >  as keys already?
>
> the reference also states that "keywords are reserved and cannot be
> used as names".  that's why the Lua designers are so reluctant to
> introduce new keywords.

But why is it that keywords cannot be used as names? There are patches
etc. around that allow it, and I don't really see the problem with it
(but maybe that's just me). Except that you could maybe "hide" certain
keywords if you use its name in _G or something, but I'd say that is
the programmer's responsibility, like many things in Lua. Isn't the
Lua filosophy to not enforce/restrict, but to empower the programmer
and assume some measure of common sense?