Re: Expanding the standard library functions?

[Peter Aronoff <telemachus@...>]

On Wednesday, January 27, 2016 at 05:54PM, Philipp Janda wrote:
> Am 27.01.2016 um 15:18 schröbte Dirk Laurie:
> >>Probably dkjson, because that's what he endorsed[1] in the Lua Toolbox[2]
> >>(just to mention another place where you can look for Lua libraries).
> >
> >The Toolbox displays only modules that have been endorsed by at least
> >one critic. Over 600 unendorsed modules remain invisible unless you are
> >logged in.
> 
> I see 871 modules listed without being logged in. Only 237 of them have
> endorsements.
> 
> >
> >Unfortunately many worthwhile modules are not even unendorsed.
> >For example, the praiseworthy "split" has not made it to the Toolbox (yet?).
> 
> And "split" is on the list (but it doesn't have an endorsement yet, so this
> could be your problem).

Maybe Pierre can speak to this, but I don't honestly know how modules get
onto Lua Toolbox. I'm the author of two modules that are listed: split and
tapered. I can't remember if I uploaded them or if someone else did. Or
maybe the toolbox just scrapes LuaRocks periodically? (I don't think that's
it because a third module I have on LuaRocks isn't listed on the toolbox.)

In any case, so many modules are unendorsed or only endorsed by one or two
people. I'm not sure how much I would make of that. But maybe I'm just
rationalizing because both of my modules are currently unendorsed. ;)

Best, Peter

PS I'm not sure how "praiseworthy" split really is. I've been using it
heavily since 2012, but as far as I know, I'm the *only* user. LuaRocks
says it's been downloaded 52 times, but I bet 90% of those downloads or
more are me or my CI testing.
-- 
We have not been faced with the need to satisfy someone else's
requirements, and for this freedom we are grateful.
    Dennis Ritchie and Ken Thompson, The UNIX Time-Sharing System