lua-users home
lua-l archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

On 20/08/16 09:17 PM, Martin wrote:
On 16-08-20 07:04 AM, Soni L. wrote:
local len = 1
while (t[len] ~= nil) do
    len = len + 1
return len

You should probably return len - 1. Otherwise {} has len 1 and {1} has
len 2.
You're right.

Tables shall be k/v pairs. The concept of an "array" shall be userland.
They already are.

So if I understand right you offer just drop part of existing
functionality for the sake of conceptual clearness. I think this
decision is hard to accept for many users.

It is. But I can't come up with a better option.

This is the only reasonable way I can come up with to reinforce the notion that tables are k/v pairs and nothing more. I mean, I can come up with unreasonable ones too, from least intrusive to most intrusive:

- Put "LENGTH IS UNDEFINED" wherever the manual mentions table length.
- Remove list syntax. (you know, {1, 2, 3, 4, 5})
- Print "LENGTH IS UNDEFINED" to stderr every time the length operator is used. - Put the length operator behind a "feature gate" that needs to be applied per chunk, otherwise the compiler tells you that "length is undefined and tables are only k/v pairs" and stuff and refuses to compile your code.

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.