Re: PATCH: hex numbers and bit ops

[Rici Lake <lua@...>]

On 5-Sep-05, at 3:26 AM, Mike Pall wrote:

> BTW: Has anyone noticed that the following:
>
>   x=1y=2print(x,y)
>
> is accepted by the lexer as valid Lua code (with or without
> my patch)?
>
> I guess most tools parsing Lua files won't handle this

Yeah, LuaParse tries to get this "right" but I can't say that I'm very 
fond of this behaviour.

e=1f=2  <-- two statements
f=1e=2  <-- error

On 5-Sep-05, at 5:47 AM, Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo wrote:

> Why shouldn't it?  It may be ugly but it's valid.
> Hence my insistence on reusing the Lua lexer...

I don't think it's entirely reasonable to expect every 
editor/source-code-highlighter/... in the world to incorporate Lua's 
lexer in order to syntax highlight Lua. Lua is *much* easier to lex 
than Perl, and somewhat easier to lex than Python, but getting rid of a 
few rough edges wouldn't hurt, imho.