Re: 5.2: equality for closures

[Alexander Gladysh <agladysh@...>]

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 16:18, Roberto Ierusalimschy
<roberto@inf.puc-rio.br> wrote:
>> Or am I wrong? Can one say that manual wording guarantees that this
>> will always work in "conforming" implementation?

> I still do not understand why you cannot use a table. A table is the
> archetypal object in Lua, something where {} ~= {} is sacrosant.

Well, I want to avoid using tables because unique table value will
pass through too many type checks (similar to assert(type(arg) ==
"table")) in my code.

But given heavy "magic" smell of the suggested alternatives, I
probably would have either to bite the bullet and use table, or create
and bind my own newproxy()... Table would probably be more
LJ2-friendly... (when/if LJ2 would support 5.2).

Alexander.