Re: Project lead nominations for standard libraries?

[David Kastrup <dak@...>]

Mark Hamburg <mark@grubmah.com> writes:

> Having kicked this off, here is what I would like to see. It's
> entirely legitimate to criticize me for not then stepping up and
> driving this, but there it is...
>
> 1. For issues like # v holes, I think we need a reasonably sized
> increase in the standard facilities within Lua. I'm thinking on the
> order of at most doubling the set of standard functionality. For that
> matter, if backwards compatibility could be tossed aside, I would
> replace the table namespace with an array namespace

[...]

Threads like this make me glad that Lua is not designed by
committee/community.  The ingenuity with which people strive to
complicate the language while making existing constructs useless for
_practical_ purposes and/or utterly inefficient is just staggering.  Of
course, in such a discussions those people perfectly fine with the
existing system's balance of usefulness don't get much of a voice.

So the better a language is designed, the more absurd the focus for
public discussions about improvement gets.

By that metric, Lua is doing fine.

-- 
David Kastrup