Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?

[duz <duz@...>]

On 11.04.2014 04:59, Hisham wrote:

> An alternative would be to do things the other way around: use __call
> as the accessor and a tracker:add() function to add data. Might be a
> good idea if you read data more often than you write it.
>
> tracker = my_fancy_tracker(3)  -- three tracks...
> tracker:add(1, 2, 3)
> tracker:add(7, 8, 9)
> local a, b, c = tracker(-1)   -- setting a,b,c=7,8,9 and
> local e, f, g = tracker(1)     -- setting e,f,g=1,2,3

Yes, and by checking the arguments of __call you can even
get away with only __call for both directions. But this quickly
becomes ambiguous.

I've settled for the :at().