Re: ipairs() and __ipairs()

[Tim Hill <drtimhill@...>]

> On Oct 26, 2014, at 1:24 PM, Patrick Donnelly <batrick@batbytes.com> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Tim Hill <drtimhill@gmail.com> wrote:
>> At the risk of doing this topic to death…
>> 
>> So now that ipairs() has been reverted to a more 5.2 like behavior, should __ipairs() still be deprecated? When ipairs() was going to just be 1..#t then this metamethod was redundant since the __len metamethod could be used to control the iteration. Now that ipairs() no longer does that, I think the __ipairs() metamethod has some justification to existing again.
> 
> I think this entire exercise has shown that it is pointless trying to
> accommodate all the desired variations of what ipairs could mean for
> an object. I like that Lua 5.3 is choosing a simple definition that
> does not rely on any metamethods (even __len). If it doesn't work for
> you, *write your own iterator*.
> 
> -- 
> Patrick Donnelly
> 

Agreed, but my reading of the docs is that it DOES honor __index, so it does rely on metamethods.

—Tim