[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: [ANN] Lua 5.3.3 (rc1) now available
- From: Jonathan Goble <jcgoble3@...>
- Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 02:32:28 -0400
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 2:13 AM, Daurnimator <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 12 May 2016 at 15:03, Jonathan Goble <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 12:49 AM, Daurnimator <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> Previously the behaviour was undefined.
>>> Changes in undefined behaviour are allowed between implementations as
>>> well as between bugfix releases.
>> While technically true, I believe consideration must be given to the
>> fact that 1) the current behavior is well-known and relied upon by
>> some people,
> Is it? Could you link to some code that uses it?
I know I've seen such code in the past, but it's been a while, and I
can't remember exactly where it was.
Let me put this another way: take a look at the Semantic Versioning
Specification.  An increment to the patch version is exclusively
for bug fixes. This is not a bug fix; this is an addition of newly
defined functionality, which according to semantic versioning, cannot
be done in a patch release and requires an increment of the minor
version number. So there is another argument in favor of waiting until
5.4 or 6.0 here.
 Yes, I know Lua doesn't fully comply with semantic versioning, but
typically it has done so at least with regard to the patch version,
which is the point of contention here.