Re: [NoW] Once more about to-be-closed variables

[Sean Conner <sean@...>]

  Um ... it's Tuesday.  Shouldn't this come out tomorrow?

It was thus said that the Great Egor Skriptunoff once stated:
> 1) *About limitations.*
> Why to-be_closed variables must be initialized at the very beginning?

  Because the variable is marked const and can't be updated once marked.

> Why they must be const?

  I think it's to prevent the value from being lost and thus, not closed. 
Remember, it's the *variable* that is marked, *NOT* the value.

> Why an error must be raised if a value doesn't have the metamethod?

  I don't like this behavior either.

> Are all these limitations necessary?

  I hope not.  I also hope the single variable limit can be lifted so one
can do (for the poster child example for this concept):

	local <toclose> file,err = io.open(filename)

  It's idiotic that right now, you have to do:

	local file,err = io.open(filename)
	local <toclose> file = file -- [1]

  -spc (assume there's a check of err after the first statement ... )

[1]	This brings up a point about luacheck.  Has anyone taken over the
	project?  I would hate to have to stop using luacheck because it
	doesn't support Lua 5.4 syntax.