Re: [ANN] Lua 5.2.0 (beta-rc2) now available

[Alexandre Rion <gaumerie@...>]

I also think that labels should be per block. I think that the previous 
behaviour was really natural once familiar with the lua synthax, avoid the 
need of making the inventory of all the labels used in the function to know 
how to called the next local-use label (such "continue"-like) and eventually 
can lead to new possibilities since it's more general. The passage to labels 
per function is just an extra-mechanism of protection against supposed 
"mindless user" that doesn't have any reason to be:
- users don't need we take care of them with such limitations. They want to 
learn and are supposed to be sufficiently open minded.
- the previous mechanism (as already stated) was really natural in the lua 
context, using the same notions of scope than local variables, and would be 
quickly adopted.
What's more, I don't see any improvement given by this modification since 
only a limitation has been added without giving any new possibility, so it 
seems me nonsense.
Actually, before that the goto was implemented by the Lua developers, the 
way I used to imagine it was as it's now in beta-rc2, because well, I'm not 
expert in theses things and it's the only way I know. But when I've seen the 
implementation in beta-rc1, I've been really well surprised to see how they 
had adapted this mechanism in a innovative and "Lua" way. So my personal 
opinion is that I would prefer to see the previous implementation coming 
back.



-----Message d'origine----- 
From: dcharno
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 8:42 AM
Cc: Lua mailing list
Subject: Re: [ANN] Lua 5.2.0 (beta-rc2) now available

On 06/22/2011 02:32 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
> dcharno<dcharno@comcast.net>  writes:
> > Its ashame. The goto syntax isn't easy on the eyes, but it was powerful
> > and allowed a reasonable workaround for standard patterns like
> > continue. But this "per function" limit really blows that; what a pity.
>
> Hmm, no it doesn't, it just forces users to pick meaningful names
> instead of just "muh, whatever, I'll just use ::continue::" -- in other
> words, the result is probably _better_ than a simple "continue" in most
> cases...
>
> [If continue were the sort of thing that gets used _a lot_ maybe this
> would be too high a burden.  But it's not.]

What's it to you if people want to "mindlessly" pick ::continue:: as
their label?  Pick a meaningful label for yourself.  What's it to you if
people use continue control structures?  Why is this so religious?