Re: A guide to building Lua modules

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

On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Philipp Janda <siffiejoe@gmx.net> wrote:
> What I wonder though: If people would have been aware of the problems of
> using global shared objects from the beginning, would string method syntax
> be as popular as it is now?

Because most people think that random monkey-patching is dumb[1], and
there's no defense against other people's decisions anyway in a
dynamic language, unless one is sandboxing them severely ;)

#3, "allow monkey-patching" - fine - usual method of defining modules
does not interfere with this right.  But I won't go to too much
trouble to bullet-proof against monkey-patching - all warranties
invalid!  I'm a little perplexed that "allow monkey-patching" is
elevated to a core consideration - it belongs in the "break the rules
if needed" category.

This all applies to regular application/scripting development, of
course.  And I respect the need of people to code around an actual
bug.

[1] http://devblog.avdi.org/2008/02/23/why-monkeypatching-is-destroying-ruby/