Re: Lua 5.3: functional version of // operator?

[David Favro <lua@...>]

On 07/09/2013 07:53 AM, Leo Razoumov wrote:
> Since Lua reached the point of syntax (backward) incompatibility would
> it be better to call it Lua-6.0 rather than Lua-5.3?

How is syntax incompatibility different from semantic incompatibility such 
as 5.2's _ENV?  Code written for 5.2 may not run correctly on 5.1 (unless 
care is taken to assure that it will), just like code written for 5.3 may 
not run correctly on 5.2 (unless care is taken to assure that it will).  In 
fact, it seems to me that the 5.2/5.1 incompatibilities are much more likely 
to manifest in real-world code than the 5.3/5.1 ones, especially if one 
doesn't choose to use the optional additional features.

-- David