Re: Conventional name proposal: merge
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: Conventional name proposal: merge
- From: Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@...>
- Date: 2012年12月14日 13:30:08 +0200
2012年12月14日 steve donovan <steve.j.donovan@gmail.com>:
> On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 8:19 AM, Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The documentation is much longer than the code!
>
> You know us - show us the code! The useful difference here is (1) n
> tables (2) arrays or maps
>
Exercise for the reader with Knuth rating 12 (out of 50) I thought …
but anyway here it is (this version is a little more liberal than the
description I posted: all non-tables are treated as empty tables,
not only null):
local function merge(...)
local s, arg = {}, {...}
local n = select('#',...)
for j=1,n do if type(arg[j])=='table' then
for k,v in pairs(arg[j]) do s[k]=v end
end end
return s
end
Exercise for the reader (that's the 12 on the Knuth
scale, otherwise it would have been more like 6):
should the outer loop rather be done with ipairs?