Re: Bloat or no bloat? (Was: [Feature request])

[Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@...>]

2014-09-21 20:02 GMT+02:00 Jay Mithani <jayvmithani@gmail.com>:
> Agreed; even the use of number values such as 2, 3, or 4 could be considered
> bloat as they can be substituted with (1+1), (1+1+1), and (1+1+1+1)
> respectively.
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 1:17 PM, Hisham <h@hisham.hm> wrote:
>>
>> On 21 September 2014 11:27, Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > "Bloat" is something that adds to the length of the manual without
>> > adding to what Lua can already do. For example, if eventually in
>> > Lua 5.3 "for i in ipairs(tbl)" turns out to be exactly equivalent to
>> > "for i=1,#tbl" then 'ipairs' will be bloat.
>>
>> I strongly disagree with your definition of "bloat". By your
>> definition, 'for' and 'while' are bloat because we have 'goto'.
>>
>> And no, I don't wish to incite a discussion on what would be a better
>> definition because it is, in the end, subjective.

So ingenious, us Lua-L posters, INTP's all.

OK, I'll change my definition to:

"Bloat" is something that adds to the combined length of the manual
and PiL without adding to what Lua can already do.

Actually, the main point of my post was not to provide a Bourbakian
definition of "bloat" but to say that supporting ideas that Roberto has
already indicated he is considering is may well be a productive way
of getting new features into Lua.