Re: Basic, no fuss, no magic, foolproof module pattern. [Was: require, module, globals and "magic"]

[Roberto Ierusalimschy <roberto@...>]

> But, until then, for me the main issue is to understand most of the
> implications of my approach, i.e. writing a module with basic Lua
> syntax, with clean, linear structure and no special support from
> custom external functions (no "safe_require", "safe_module" or
> similar).
> And whether that kind of module could be robust, efficient, well
> encapsulated, generally applicable, with no pitfalls (or with
> well-known ones!), i.e "simple and foolproof", even if a bit verbose
> (compared with other approaches like yours, which rely on an
> additional framework).

I would say that now the "endorsed by the Lua team" way to write
modules is like this: using clean and basic Lua syntax.

-- Roberto