Re: Why not Just PHP-stupid include?

["Patrick Mc(avery" <patrick@...>]

On 11-10-18 10:01 AM, andre@leiradella.com wrote:
> > Let's say I define 1 function and put it in a file called function.lua,
> > it looks something like this:
> >
> > function silly1() print "reallly long string that greets user" end
> >
> > and define 1 local variable
> > local x = 10
> > and put it in another file called local.lua.
> You do realize that in your example x is local but silly1 is global, right?
>
> Why don't you declare x as a global? It seems to me that it's what you want.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Andre
Hi Andre

No I meant them both to be local, it's not real code for anything I want 
to do. I am just trying to say that if I type local x = 1 in another 
file and then include it, I would like it become local to where it was 
included from and not the file it was defined in.

List,

I mentioned a function called copy_in in another post and had no 
replies, likely due to the stupidity of the name. However a function 
name that described something like this could be used in tandem with 
require/dofile to break a bigger problem into smaller chunks, by giving 
different users what they need and again I think that non-programmers 
should be first in line.

Alternatively perhaps a different file extension would help, a kind of 
lua header that would define code that is essentially copied in verbatim 
with no scope effect.

Thanks