[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Project lead nominations for standard libraries?
- From: Steve Litt <slitt@...>
- Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 17:42:25 -0500
On Saturday 01 January 2011 15:30:47 kevin beckford wrote:
> > To be honest though, I'm not even sure those advocating "fixing" what
> > isn't broken here aren't just a (very) vocal minority.
> I would request that the language not be changed. '#' certainly is an
> odd concept to the newcomer, but if it behaves regularly, then it is
> an idiomatic part and will be learned. The goal in any language is
> to use it idiomatically, after all.
I'm always a big fan of not changing something in a language unless it's
REALLY necessary, given that it will cause old code to break.
After seeing the huge discussion of #, I personally wouldn't be caught dead
using it. First of all, pairs() and next() can be used to iterate through any
table, removing one of the main uses of #. If I must know the number of items,
I can always have a "items" key with the count for a value. If I must know the
highest integer subscript, I can always keep it in a "hi" key. If making a
ring buffer, I can always use a "lo" key. I don't know, maybe there's a
performance penalty for these things, but using a table of key->value pairs
makes it very easy to keep track of things like this.
Recession Relief Package