Re: [PATCH] Jump Tables for Switch/Case and Computed Goto

[Paige DePol <lual@...>]

On May 5, 2014, at 11:47 PM, Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2014-05-06 3:26 GMT+02:00 Paige DePol <lual@serfnet.org>:
> 
> Thanks for the good documentation.

You are most welcome. I really hate when code has no documentation, so I try not to be "one of those people"!

> 
> There is no patch to `lua.h`. When the executable is invoked,
> it still welcomes you with the same message that the unpatched
> Lua 5.3 does.
> 
> The Wiki entry on patches [1] says: «If you apply a patch that changes
> the syntax or semantics of Lua, the resulting language should not be
> called "Lua".»
> 
> This patch introduces six new keywords, two new composite symbols
> and a new VM instruction.
> 
> That seems enough to justify a pretty dramatic name change, not
> merely something like Lua++. Maybe one of the larger moons of
> Jupiter or Saturn. Maybe even an asteroid.
> 
> [1] <http://lua-users.org/wiki/LuaPowerPatches>

Yes, it says if you *apply* a patch that changes Lua you should not call the resulting language Lua.

I am not applying a patch, I am creating a patch.

I believe a patch should only change as much of the source code as it needs to run. Things like the name of the resulting program, after any number of patches from any number of sources have been applied, should be the responsibility of the person creating the patched version of Lua, not the creator of a patch.

I downloaded a number of patch files from the Power Patches wiki page and none of them patched lua.h to change the name of Lua. Also, if every patch changed the name of Lua then every patch would conflict and would have to be edited before they could be used.

Thank you for your feedback, and for bringing up this issue for discussion! :)

~pmd~