Re: [ANN] Luacheck 0.19.0

[Sean Conner <sean@...>]

It was thus said that the Great Martin once stated:
> On 03/03/2017 08:26 PM, Dirk Laurie wrote:
> > What is the main reason for using Luacheck?
> >
> > (a) A debugging tool.
> > (b) Enforcing a certain style of coding.
> > (c) Advising a programmer on things in his program that
> > might make trouble one day.
> >
> 
> All use cases I encountered in production work was (b).

  And mine are (c).  luacheck helped fine some potential bugs in the code at
work (mostly inadvertent globals but some mistakes on shadowing previous
variables).

> > Turing has already taught us that we can't use
> > a program to test correctness of a program. Why clutter
> > Luacheck with exceptional cases?
> 
> Especially in dynamic languages as Lua. Where functions can
> generate functions and arbitrary string can be converted to
> function via load().
> 
> I believe only way to get result of program is execute it.
> (And hope Turing believed/proved this too.)

  While it's true in general that Turing proved that there are some things a
program can't determine from source code alone, that shouldn't preclude the
checks we *can* do to minimize bugs.

  -spc (And those checks that luacheck does that I disagree with I disable ... )