[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: [ANN] Lua 5.3.3 (rc1) now available
- From: Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@...>
- Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 10:03:36 +0200
2016-05-12 7:03 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Goble <email@example.com>:
> I understand that it is technically undefined and thus technically can
> be changed, but I think enough people are relying on this (e.g. I'm
> guessing that many string-splitting functions are coded to work with
> the existing behavior) that it's going to break too much code to be
> acceptable for a bugfix release.
> It's a case of "an exception to every rule"; in this case, we have
> behavior that is undefined, yet well-known and relied upon, and common
> sense tells me it will break too much code to include in a release
> that's supposed to be backwards compatible, despite the rule that
> technically allows it.
"undefined ... yet relied on". Seriously?
Code that does that is already broken, even though it appears to be
working, rather like a cracked cup that still manages to hold hot coffee.