Re: Some enhancements in table initializations

[Jonathan Castello <twisolar@...>]

On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 11:52 PM, Jonathan Castello <twisolar@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 11:44 PM, Geoff Leyland
> <geoff_leyland@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> On 21/09/2010, at 6:37 PM, Jonathan Castello wrote:
>>
>>> While not exactly about table initializations, one thing I've
>>> occasionally wanted was to be able to implicitly index the current
>>> environment. In a table you can do {[a + b] = c}, but it would be nice
>>> to be able to do [a + b] = c as a normal statement. Likewise with
>>> accessing: x = [y].
>>
>>
>> Wouldn't that cause ambiguous syntax problems?   Would "a = b [c]:d()" be one or two statements?
>
> I'm not sure how it could be construed in any other way than "a =
> (b[c]):d()" in that context. Were you supposing that 'b' might be a
> function? As far as I recall, functions can only accept a string
> literal or a table literal as an argument without requiring
> parentheses, so "b t[d]" is already syntactically invalid.
>
> ~Jonathan
>

Nevermind, I misunderstood what you meant by "statements". You mean it
could be interpreted as "a = b; [c]:d()"? That's a good point, I guess
there's no getting around that one.

~Jonathan