[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: bit.lshift and performance - luabitop v.s. lua-5.2.0-work4
- From: Mike Pall <mikelu-1010@...>
- Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 13:13:54 +0200
Miles Bader wrote:
> bit.lshift (NUM, bit.band (COUNT, 31))
> [instead of plain "bit.lshift (NUM, COUNT)"]
Oh, sure. ;-) Because absolutely everyone is just waiting to
rewrite all of their code with that bloat. Not gonna happen.
Anyway, this is going nowhere. The "bit.*" namespace, as defined
by lbitlib and the upwards-compatible Lua BitOp, already has a
large, existing user base and code base, built over several years.
Anyone insisting on creating an incompatible library ought to pick
a different namespace.