Re: [SUGGESTION] Some lfs functionality in os library, please!

On 7 September 2016 at 17:53, Daurnimator <quae@daurnimator.com> wrote:

On 8 September 2016 at 00:40, Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@gmail.com> wrote:
> Every time I require lfs, I ask myself: why is this stuff not in the
> os library?

Everytime I see the `os` library I ask: why did this come with lua? I
always replace it with my own variants anyway.

Any examples? Lua only or Lua + C module?

As the python community has slowly learned: the standard libraries are
where functions go to die. see
http://www.leancrew.com/all-this/2012/04/where-modules-go-to-die/

Once, I was a programmer writing C#. The language evolved hugely over the time

that it didn't almost look like a same language after a few versions. But Lua is a

different, its syntax hasn't changed a much in years (5.1 is still mainstream, and

was released over ten years ago). Nor its libraries. Some changes here and there,

but quite stable still. What I mean is that with Lua those modules would not rot as

much as with other languages. And we all mostly talking here about single static

functions. I'm not sure how having os.dir / fs.dir or something would suck anyone's

air as the article puts it out. We are not talking here about having HTTP(S) client

implemented as a standard Lua library.

I kinda agree with Dirk. I understand also that allowing people write OS dependent

code is not exactly the same as having (more) OS dependent code added in Lua

sources. But I also have to agree that some batteries should be provided in a year

of 2016.