Re: 'table' as fallback for tables

[Thomas Jericke <tjericke@...>]

On 07/01/2016 01:30 PM, Martin wrote:
> On 16-06-30 05:11 PM, Tim Hill wrote:
> > > What about {1, [3]=3, 2} ? {1, [2]=2, 2} ? etc
> > 2 and 2. The largest implicit key. As I said, this is the *least* surprising, not that it has no surprises at all.
> Huh. And what length of sequence should be after
>
> local t = {1, [2]=2, 2}
> table.remove(t, 2)
> --print(t[2])
> ?
>
> I think, better approach is to explicitly separate array part from hash
> part. But then we need separate indexing method for array part. Maybe
> syntax like "a.2" ?
If a.2 is anything else than a["2"], I would find it very confusing.
--
Thomas