Re: Why can't I do for...in on a table?

[Wim Couwenberg <wcou@...>]

> > Also, it seems like it would be more efficient to use a table directly 
> > for a couple of reasons. First, the special code that must have been 
> > in place to handle a table directly would be faster than having to 
> > make a function call every time.
>
> Lua 4 didn't reenter the VM at least.  I suppose that was a bit faster. 

Sorry, 5.0 (and 5.1) doesn't either since "next" is a C function.  I 
guess the luaD_call will still have some overhead compared to calling 
luaH_next directly but I'm not sure how much.

--
Wim