Re: Proposal for a standard way of defining custom operators in Lua

[steve donovan <steve.j.donovan@...>]

On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 3:45 PM, Fabien <fleutot+lua@gmail.com> wrote:

Fancy syntaxes tend to improve your ability to map your own thoughts onto code, but make your code more impenetrable by anybody else.... I might enjoy playing with mine, but not at the price of risking having to play with those of other people

That's what I've come to believe.  After all, I did a Lua macro package, but I don't use it, because the code I do must be share-able with community and colleagues.[2]  (LuaMacro is used for precisely one project of mine, winapi, and then it's used as C preprocessor [1])

And +1 for operator overloads respecting algebraic properties!

steve d.

[1] which could seriously do with a better preprocessor. But still there's a ground rule that the C generated by LM macros must itself still be good C that another person could work with. So e.g. we don't strip out comments, and allow #line statements to be optionally suppressed.

[2] if I don't need to share (say for private prototyping and experiments) I'm tending to reach for Moonscript these days