Re: A major problem with the Lua ecosystem

[Paige DePol <lual@...>]

Soni They/Them L. <fakedme@gmail.com> wrote:

> local MOD_LUA = "B72AF792-1509-54D6-9B46-1EE59547AA2B"
> local MOD_SC = "6CC24CA3-0D40-550D-9B0F-EF54C94C54C1"
> local MOD_IDK = "13DC8997-46AB-54E2-9BC4-10C88CFAC5D4"
> 
> local syslog   = require (MOD_SC .. ".syslog")
> local fsys     = require (MOD_SC .. ".fsys")
> local tty      = require (MOD_IDK .. ".tty")
> local xdg      = require (MOD_IDK .. ".xdg")
> local viewfunc = require (MOD_IDK .. ".luaview.viewfunc")
> local viewtab  = require (MOD_IDK .. ".luaview.viewtab")
> local debug    = require (MOD_LUA .. ".debug")
> local table    = require (MOD_LUA .. ".table")
> local string   = require (MOD_LUA .. ".string")
> local os       = require (MOD_LUA .. ".os")

The point of this conversation was less about the format of the module
identifiers and more about how you were opposed to domain style identifiers
because you don't like centralisation... regardless of the fact that the
domain style identifiers can be used without the need to actually register
them with anyone at all.

You never really answered the question about what makes your idea for using
UUIDs any better vs using any other arbitrary string, including strings that
happen to look like domain names.

Given that Lua itself converts "." to path separators I do wonder if the
intent was to facilitate domain name style identifiers as well? Otherwise
why replace "." and not any other character, like ":" or even "::"?

~Paige