Re: t[] = 'syntactic sugar'

[Enrico Colombini <erix@...>]

On 19/01/2012 13.36, Leo Razoumov wrote:
> t[#t+1] is more efficient. It directly translates into SETTABLE opcode
> while append goes through a function call first.

Minimalistic (just for the sake of discussion):

  t[+] = val   //adds parsing cost

or:

  t[++] = val  //adds new operator too

or:

  t[#+] = val  //(possibly cheaper in parsing?)

For a new "table append" construct to make sense beyond syntactic sugar 
(i.e. to save the +1 operation), I guess it would probably also require 
a new bytecode operator; I'm not sure it would be worth it.

--
  Enrico