[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: module() with _ENV
- From: Petite Abeille <petite.abeille@...>
- Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 21:51:26 +0200
On Mar 31, 2010, at 9:07 PM, Roberto Ierusalimschy wrote:
> No. It implies that you will be able to do what setfenv/getfenv did
> by using debug.setupvalue/debug.getupvalue.
Hmmm... if that's the case... why not keep setfenv/getfenv and re-implement it in terms of _ENV?
> (There are some caveats
> [see message from Mark Hamburg], but it is mostly doable.)
Are you referring to the, hmm, subtlety about shared _ENV?
"If you want to follow the original semantics, it is still possible (mostly), but it is not trivial. "
That seems a good reason enough (i.e. not trivial) to let setfenv/getfenv implement it, no?
Also, out of curiosity, what's driving that sudden hatred for setfenv/getfenv and the apparent new quest to replace it with these various 'in' or '_ENV' or ... proposals?