Re: Proposal for table length operator

[Enrico Colombini <erix@...>]

On 14/12/2010 5.03, Keith Matthews wrote:
> So here's yet another proposal for the table length operator. It is
> simple to understand, simple to implement, useful, and with a low
> algorithmic cost (i.e. O(1) to update or to query the length of a
> table.) Even better, arrays with holes and sparse arrays would not be
> a special case anymore.

I find this proposal interesting (it also has the added advantage of 
increasing performance); its main problem, as you note, is the amount of 
code that would break because of "t[#t] = nil".

--
  Enrico