Re: mathlib

[Petite Abeille <petite.abeille@...>]

On Apr 7, 2014, at 9:39 PM, Hisham <h@hisham.hm> wrote:

> Still, if I was told at gunpoint to "remove some functions from the
> standard Lua library now!" the ones I'd certainly remove would be
> math.pow and string.len. They are, after all, redundant (not
> "redundant" in the sense that you can code it in terms of other
> primitives (in that case why don't we remove `while` since it can now
> be written in terms of `goto`), but "really redundant" in the sense
> that there's already another function/operator that does the _exact
> same thing_).

I personally favor aString:len() (or even string.len( aString ) ) over #aString every time. And I would rather have table.len( aTable ) than #aTable. Suffering from quite an aversion to obscure diacritical notations. But, eh, each to their own.

(And not specially looking forward to witness all these Klingon based hackery these bitwise operators are going to produce in earnest. Sigh.)

(Lost count on how many metamethods and associated obscure notation marks there are in 5.3, over 20 now? Good job indeed keeping the language tight and focussed.)

(And here we are arguing about the whereabouts of trivialities such as sinh, cosh, tanh while not blinking an eyelash adding a full fledge utf8 library to the core. Not that I mind utf8,  but still, let not argue about some false sense of preordained ‘smallness' )