Re: changes in 'require'

[David Burgess <dburgess@...>]

I like Javiers solution description.
If I think of this as what would make the documentation easy to write,
we are left with Robertos suggestion of rollback to work6 or take
Javiers solution. In some ways a description of 
require'x.y' will try require'x' is what one would intuitively expect.
Methinks the problem is that there are two masters
a) The package author 
b) The package user
IMHO where there is a competing requirement, the package user must
win out. The primary aim of require() being to make Lua packages
widely and faultlessly usable.
I think a package user has to know less if a Javier like solution
is adopted.

David Burgess

On 7/12/05, Diego Nehab <diego@tecgraf.puc-rio.br> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > (Of course that only works for one single big file, but that seems to be
> > the ultimate goal after all, at least for the obsessive ;)
> 
> I guess we want to cater to those that are only *marginally*
> obsessive too. :)
> 
> []s,
> Diego.
>