[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Nil and false in Lua design
- From: Andrew Starks <andrew.starks@...>
- Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 13:58:55 -0500
On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 6:38 AM, steve donovan
<steve.j.donovan@gmail.com> wrote:
> Up to some point, consistency is overvalued.
This is a really interesting point that I'll have to think about. It
sits nicely with an earlier one that you made along the lines
over-checking types and productivity.
If I may represent the voice of inexperience, I view consistency as
food. If I see something that is inconsistent, then I imagine that the
world of unknowns to is actually much larger than I thought it was. I
try to work the inconsistency into an understanding and sometimes by
definition, that's impossible. It's just one more "except." It's also
the opposite of simple and may be the line between it and its
opposite: easy.
So, when I see `tostring(x)`, I expect that there is also `tonumber`
and `toboolean` and even `tonil` or totable, as nonsensical as the
last two might seem/be.
That's all. I don't have an actual opinion to share.
-Andrew
- References:
- Nil and false in Lua design, Alexander Gladysh
- Re: Nil and false in Lua design, Coda Highland
- Re: Nil and false in Lua design, Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo
- Re: Nil and false in Lua design, Thomas Jericke
- Re: Nil and false in Lua design, steve donovan
- Re: Nil and false in Lua design, Dirk Laurie
- Re: Nil and false in Lua design, Carsten Fuchs
- Re: Nil and false in Lua design, Thomas Jericke
- Re: Nil and false in Lua design, steve donovan
- Re: Nil and false in Lua design, Carsten Fuchs
- Re: Nil and false in Lua design, steve donovan