[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Lua and composition
- From: Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@...>
- Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 08:46:57 +0200
2017-03-02 0:59 GMT+02:00 Tim Hill <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> On Feb 28, 2017, at 10:50 PM, Dirk Laurie <email@example.com> wrote:
> 2017-03-01 3:10 GMT+02:00 Soni L. <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> Quick standard questionnaire, marks from 0 to 10, 5=neutral,
> 1. Clarity of proposal?
> 2. New idea?
> 3. Do opportunities for using it arise often?
> 4. Will it improve clarity of coding?
> 5. Efficiency?
> 6. Attractiveness of implementation?
> My ratings:
> 10, 0 (the OP himself claimed to have proposed this before April 2016 ),
> 8, 10, 5, 2 (prefer the way suggested in ).
> Cloud Wu has pointed out the start of the previous thread; my references
> also come from there.
> That time, only the three of us endorsed the idea. Maybe its time has
> now come.
>  http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2016-04/msg00186.html
>  http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2016-04/msg00184.html
> I’m not sure of the clarity of “v.v:x.y:a.b:name(args)” .. my head spins
> when tings get that deeply nested. However, I do agree that a:b.c(args) does
> make sense, so +1 to that.
Soni has proved to me that I did indeed propose the multi-colon
version some time ago, so I must confess and ask absolution for
that sin, but my current preference is also to allow one colon only.