Re: Lua as replacement for Bash scripting

[Alexander Gladysh <agladysh@...>]

On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 05:29, David Manura <dm.lua@math2.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 8:33 PM, Alexander Gladysh <agladysh@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 7, 2010 at 22:59, Hisham <hisham.hm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Agreed. I think we could get away with two modules, sh (pure-Lua) and
>>> sh.fs (with the optional dependencies).

>> Hmm... I, usually, do not like putting unrelated things in a single
>> namespace :-)

> You've come across one confusion that the Lua 5.1 module system
> introduces, which is that "sh.fs" could be a module name or a variable
> inside the "sh" module or both.  This brings up a variety of boring
> questions such as

<...>

You've listed perfectly valid reasons (and a solution), thanks, but my
concerns are more related to a design style than to the technical
limitations.

Alexander.