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

[Ralph Hempel <rhempel@...>]

Duncan Cross wrote:
...
> Now, some people think it's worth slacking off a bit on this
> philosophy, but this suggestion is a complete reversal: it encourages
> code where, not only do you have to be familiar with the language to
> make sense of what a chunk of arbitrary Lua code is doing, but you
> have to be familiar with the author's personal set of favourite custom
> operators.
...

I'll stop you right there and tell a joke:

Q: How many Forth programmers does it take to screw in a lightbulb
A: Just one, but it has to be the person that installed the lightbulb

Don't even get me started on overloading things like "<<" and ">>"

Ralph