Re: Declared UpValues, change to Parser.

["Soni L." <fakedme@...>]

On 04/05/16 01:50 AM, Duane Leslie wrote:
> > This is nice and all, but ever heard of loadx[1]?
> >
> > [1]: https://github.com/SoniEx2/loadx
> I hadn't heard of loadx, but it doesn't solve the same problem.  I'm
> not clear exactly on what loadx does that isn't achievable with the
> existing debug functions, but it seems that it just provides a
> convenience method for binding upvalues when loading a function.
Without exposing the debug library. (read: sandbox-safe)
> The point of the changes I made was to declare the order and legality
> of upvalues at the point of parsing Lua code.
>
> To demonstrate, take the example from the loadx README:
>
> local fc2 = string.dump(function() print(UP1[UP2]) end) -- function code 2
> local fc3 = string.dump(function() local val = UP1[UP2]; print(val)
> end) -- function code 3
>
> These two functions (`fc2` from the README, `fc3` as my modified
> version) access the same upvalues but in a different order and so
> loadx will fail to return the correctly bound function in the `fc3`
> case.
>
> My proposal is to have identical upvalues and ordering regardless of
> the function body.
>
> local fc4 = string.dump(function () <_ENV,UP1,UP2> print(UP1[UP2]) end)
> local fc5 = string.dump(function () <_ENV,UP1,UP2> local val =
> UP1[UP2]; print(val) end)
>
> Regards,
>
> Duane.

--
Disclaimer: these emails may be made public at any given time, with or without reason. If you don't agree with this, DO NOT REPLY.