Re: [ANN] Microlight (was Re: paving cowpaths with libraries)

[Ross Bencina <rossb-lists@...>]

On 20/02/2012 5:56 PM, steve donovan wrote:
> (There is a temptation to game the system and overload functions too
> much.  table.insert is already a standard function which is really two
> functions, insert() and append())

Do you think table.insert should be taken as a guide that "Lua style" 
function design is to overload things in semantically confusing ways? Is 
there really an benefit for conflating insert() and append().

I remember when I first started using lua the lack of an append function 
was very confusing. I had to work out how to implement it, and I din't 
find insert() until later, instead opting for something like x[#x]=y

The reason I ask is that if there is a "Lua way" with these things it 
should guide the library design -- even if it seems strange. No point 
trying to have a pythonic library if the lua core library doesn't behave 
that way.

Otherwise I shall mount a campaign for behavioral clarity and the 
separation of insert() and append() -- as would be normal in the rest of 
my world ;)

Ross.