[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Basic, no fuss, no magic, foolproof module pattern. [Was: require, module, globals and "magic"]
- From: Petite Abeille <petite_abeille@...>
- Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 15:23:52 +0200
On Aug 18, 2010, at 2:24 PM, Roberto Ierusalimschy wrote:
> I would say that now the "endorsed by the Lua team" way to write
> modules is like this: using clean and basic Lua syntax
Then there is no "endorsed" way, as "clean and basic Lua syntax" is in the eye of the beholder. At least module() provide something a bit more concrete and functional than such a vagueness.
- References:
- Basic, no fuss, no magic, foolproof module pattern. [Was: require, module, globals and "magic"], Lorenzo Donati
- Re: Basic, no fuss, no magic, foolproof module pattern. [Was: require, module, globals and "magic"], Sean Conner
- Re: Basic, no fuss, no magic, foolproof module pattern. [Was: require, module, globals and "magic"], Lorenzo Donati
- Re: Basic, no fuss, no magic, foolproof module pattern. [Was: require, module, globals and "magic"], Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Prev by Date:
Re: Audience for globals discussion?
- Next by Date:
Re: Lua semantic higlighting for Vim [Was: Re: Lua Semantic Highlighting for Emacs]
- Previous by thread:
Re: Basic, no fuss, no magic, foolproof module pattern. [Was: require, module, globals and "magic"]
- Next by thread:
Re: Basic, no fuss, no magic, foolproof module pattern. [Was: require, module, globals and "magic"]
- Index(es):
