> if everything was changed to match your personal definition of normal?
you got me wrong, I just wanted to know first hand why LUA comunity was supporting what "I called" LUA oddities. I expected to find good (unknown to me) reasons supporting these “oddities” So far I just got simply reality denying and nonsense, then I hope some of
LUA developers reading this will someday reconsider these topics, that’s
how languages evolve…
I'm just an user, I do not want any change made just to please "me"... I'm nobody here...
>the different syntax is so helpful in reminding me which language I'm in.
you see; more reality denying... The marketing strategy of converting a "real" drawback in a "fake" advantage... give me a breake...
>If you want an array, zero indexed or not, it is a pretty trivial extension to write one
again; yes and the performance penalty makes you consider probably _javascript_ would've been a better option...
anyway...
--- On Mon, 6/18/12, Kevin Martin <kev82@khn.org.uk> wrote:
From: Kevin Martin <kev82@khn.org.uk>
Subject: Re: LUA oddities..
To: "Lua mailing list" <lua-l@lists.lua.org>
Date: Monday, June 18, 2012, 4:12 AM
Do you think there may be use cases of Lua where the oddities may be quite useful? How do you think the people who like the oddities as they are would feel if everything was changed to match your personal definition of normal?
I am currently in the process of scripting our optimisation engine and am constantly flitting between C++ and Lua, the different syntax is so helpful in reminding me which language I'm in. Also, when you start defining anonymous functions in tables, you will be very thankful that 'end' and '}' are different symbols.
As for arrays, Lua doesn't have them, it has tables. If you want an array, zero indexed or not, it is a pretty trivial extension to write one, and IIRC the Programming In Lua book even gives an example.
Thanks,
Kevin
|
Considering myself “new” to LUA includes the already spent 4+ weeks working on it
I would not ever posted anything here with less time on the language…
I still think LUA would be a better language addressing these oddities I’ve mentioned.
Best
Pat
--- On Mon, 6/18/12, Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: LUA oddities..
To: "Lua mailing list" <lua-l@lists.lua.org>
Date: Monday, June 18, 2012, 3:22 AM
> I’m new to LUA ...
Do about four weeks of work on changing that, and
you'll miraculously find tyourself able to answer these:
> 1) I couldn’t believe ...
> 2) Why you guys do not use ...
> 3) Why there’s not ...
|
|
