Re: Why no for table-iterator like e. g. "hashpairs"?

[Francisco Olarte <folarte@...>]

Replying to myself, I was curious and did some more experiments.
Sending them to try to convince people to not trust order in
non-sequences:

On Fri, Nov 1, 2019 at 5:47 PM Francisco Olarte <folarte@peoplecall.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> > for k,v in pairs(t) do print(k,v, k%4, k%8, k%16) end
> 44444    4    0    4    12
> 33333    3    1    5    5
> 22222    2    2    6    14
> 11111    1    3    7    7
> <<<

It seems to be 4:> t={[3]=1,[6]=2,[9]=3,[12]=4}
> for k,v in pairs(t) do print(k,v, k%4, k%8, k%16) end
12    4    0    4    12
9    3    1    1    9
6    2    2    6    6
3    1    3    3    3

And, as I suspected, insertion order matters:

> t={[3]=1,[6]=2,[9]=3,[13]=4}
> for k,v in pairs(t) do print(k,v, k%4, k%8, k%16) end
13    4    1    5    13
9    3    1    1    9
6    2    2    6    6
3    1    3    3    3
> t={[3]=1,[6]=2,[13]=4,[9]=3}
> for k,v in pairs(t) do print(k,v, k%4, k%8, k%16) end
9    3    1    1    9
13    4    1    5    13
6    2    2    6    6
3    1    3    3    3
>
( This seems to indicate modulo 2^n, open hashing, I did not remember
the details, read it many versions ago )

Francisco Olarte.