Re: verification and linting of lua implementations

[Roberto Ierusalimschy <roberto@...>]

> On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Roberto Ierusalimschy
> <roberto@inf.puc-rio.br> wrote:
> > Do you know what is happening here?
> >
> > | -esym(767,setnvalue,TValuefields,NILCONSTANT,numfield,
> > |           val_,num_,rttype,ttisnumber,ttisequal,checktag,
> > |                 settt_,setobj,lua_number2int,lua_number2integer,lua_number2unsigned)
> > |                 // macro defined differently in another module
> 
> The "lua_number2int,lua_number2integer,lua_number2unsigned" are
> flagged due to the lack of a "#define LUA_CORE" in lctype.c (shouldn't
> this be there?).

Sure!


> [...]  Moreover, these--and luai_hashnum which uses them--are not
> part of the API spec, so user programs including lua.h without
> LUA_CORE should not in theory use them either (if so, shouldn't these
> be renamed luai_number2* ?), but even if they did then the fallback
> "following definitions always work, but may be slow" will still be
> acceptable.  So, it probably works but is a little confusing.

These macros are currently defined in 'llimits.h', which is an
internal header, so user programs including lua.h do not see those
definitions.

Thanks for the explanations,

-- Roberto