Re: modules, require, magic

[Roberto Ierusalimschy <roberto@...>]

> In terms of "fixing module()", I think Fabio's implementation is right
> on the money:
> 
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lang.lua.general/84283

What exaclty is it trying to fix?


> It shows that a sane implementation of module() can be done with
> standard Lua mechanisms. Do any of the anti-module proponents see any
> problems with that design? Would you hate module() as much as you do
> now if it behaved like that instead of the way it behaves in Lua 5.1?

Isn't it even more complex/magic than the current implementation?

If you really want 'module', wouldn't be simpler to use

_ENV = module(...)

with a simplified version of 'module'?

-- Roberto