[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: [proposal] Libary changes
- From: Terry Bayne <trbayne@...>
- Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 09:00:46 -0500
On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 08:47, Marc Balmer <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Am 07.10.11 15:42, schrieb Sebastien Lai:
--- snippage ---
Do you know what that would mean to all the existing codebase... ?
Every that uses the current form would have to change his software just
because of your personal taste? You can't be serious?
I believe this is a whole lot more than just a personal taste issue. I've often thought that those values would be best encapsulated in some way. I like this idea. As for having to change the existing code base... unless you are upgrading to the version where this change is implemented it really is a non-issue. Given that most uses for Lua are embedded inside a host program, it isn't unusual for these instances to NOT be updated all that often.
Impractical and quite crazy to even suggest such a change. If you dont
like _G etc. why don't you make a table for you that contains these
elements? That would be easy enough.
"quite crazy"? That's a bit harsh. This was simply a suggestion. I see value in this idea, especially the idea that the other information could be exposed and available in the proposed "sys" module - information like compiler switches used to build the Lua engine.
Peace and Light