[no subject]

[Duck <duck@...>]

> An alternative would be to replace:
>
>  loadstring(modulecode)(modulename)
>
> by:
>
>  package.preload[modulename] = loadstring(modulecode)
>  require(modulename)

Yep, that's what I want.

> Just out of curiosity, why do you want to use loadfile/loadstring
> rather than require ?

I wanted to void having to write a loader for require...but as you show 
above, that 'loader' is as simple as using package.preload[].

Your way is better because it makes it possible to do this:

 package.preload[modulename] = loadstring(modulecode)
 . . . arbitrary amount of time or space in between . . .
 require(modulename)

which also means that the module needn't actually get require()ed unless 
and until it is wanted. My way effectively forces a require() whether 
strictly needed or not.

Thanks.