On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 6:44 PM, Dibyendu Majumdar
<mobile@majumdar.org.uk> wrote:
I know that some of the folks on this list do not think so as is
evident from the continuous stream of feature requests. But I can't
think of any feature that I would want added to Lua 5.3 that would
justify breaking backward compatibility. There are some things that I
wish were different about Lua - e.g. I wish that variables were local
by default, or that arrays and hash maps were distinct types, but I
would not want such changes if it meant breaking existing code.
It takes good taste and years of effort to create a language such as
Lua. Despite some 'warts' overall Lua 5.3 appears to have reached a
state of perfection (or maturity) in my view.
Regards
Dibyendu
"Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but
when there is nothing left to take away."
The 5.x series as a whole is probably pretty close to perfect in terms
of language design. The variations appear to be mostly bikeshedding.
