 |
lua-l archive |
|
|
||
|
On 9/29/2010 5:52 PM, Peter Sommerfeld wrote:
It is not hard if you stick with your preferred idioms. You cannot have both, flexibility and simplicity, choices come for a price. And it is not apologistic if I prefer a small, fast and flexible language over an inflexible one with a fixed set of policies and rules.
Interesting example; in my opinion, adding the OOBit would actually increase the flexibility of Lua. Adding the ability to flag some table functions as object oriented, which would make them always behave as expected, means that you can either use the traditional access methods, where everything is explicit, or you can use the new semantics, where users are less likely to trip up.
If it turned out that doing this would hurt the performance of normal table/function calls, or alternately added more than a few dozen lines of code to the code base, I'd change my position. I also want Lua to be small and fast.
But if it CAN be done with a minimal patch that doesn't hurt performance in any significant way, then I don't see how it does anything but improve the usability of Lua, and reduce the headaches of new users.
Tim