[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Re: OOBit
- From: Nilson <nilson.brazil@...>
- Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 11:03:36 -0300
On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Tomas Guisasola Gorham
> I would say exactly that! I like the fact that we are not tied
> to objects in Lua. We can write OO-like code but we are not forced to.
As a C programmer, I agree with you. I really like to receive a
pointer to a memory position and have the freedom to choose how to
handle that set of bytes. I´m not joking.
But C also offers a more controlled way to handle data with types and
"function propotypes" while maintaining the classical way too. IMO, it
does that to help the programmers, not to "imprision" them. The OOBit
patch has the same intent: help.
Please note. I'm not try to imposing the OOBit patch ( an impossible
intention ). I'm just try to clarify its purpose whenever I think it