Re: [Feature request]: analogous to --- if __name__ == “__main__”: ---- of python in lua modules

[<tonyp@...>]

> No bloat required here.

Totally agreed, as long as there is always a (reasonable) way to do what has 
to be done!

Or else, the tool can be viewed as crippled.  And, if people find they 
cannot use it in this or that situation (because something is always missing 
that makes it difficult for them to complete the job because either there is 
no workaround, or the workaround is more complex that the application at 
hand), they will prefer to use some other tool that does the job, and the 
more they use something else, the less popularity Lua will maintain/gain. 
And, ..., ..., ..., ..., ..., ..., death!

Another argument: If everything someone needs is always seen as bloat (by 
those who don't need it) then Lua development should stop where it is right 
now.  If Lua is currently in a state where everything (granted, everything 
for which it was intended) can be handled already, what's the point of 
further development (other than to fix bugs, or optimize execution 
performance)?

-----Original Message----- 
From: andrew
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2014 3:34 PM
To: Lua mailing list
Subject: Re: PossibleSpam(9.169):[Feature request]: analogous to --- if 
__name__ == “__main__”: ---- of python in lua modules

I'm so grateful to the Lua developers for not allowing leaks of other
technologies into the beautiful concept of Lua. Long may it remain so.
No bloat required here.