Re: Proposal: package.(c)path as tables

[Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@...>]

2017-09-07 20:50 GMT+02:00 szbnwer@gmail.com <szbnwer@gmail.com>:

> the _t suffix is bad, because future dirt, the 'paths' can be good,
> but an another guess is lookup and lookup_c or whatever, there can be
> always a new name, that is not like A -> A and A+suffix -> A+suffix -
> and now a 4th version to remove the unnecessary suffix, and get an
> another compatibility issue for those who relied on the suffix
> version...

Since we are now revamping package.path altogether, why stop
at a table? It could be a userdata. All sorts of system functions
hidden opaquely under the hood. Maybe even integrate it with
a really sophisticated package searcher like kpathsea.