Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?
- From: steve donovan <steve.j.donovan@...>
- Date: 2014年4月10日 13:33:47 +0200
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 1:03 PM, Dirk Zoller <duz@sol-3.de> wrote:
> Is there is a good technical reason for this truncation?
It is in a very important part of the VM, and any extra work at this
point is going to slow the usual case down. (By how much, I don't
know.)
Personally I don't see why your second-choice solution 'local a,b,c =
tracker:at(1)' is so bad or so inefficient. It at least has a clear
meaning from context, which is the essence of my criticism. I would
personally have grave difficulty reading code using the suggested
multi-return __index.
- References:
- __index returns truncated to one, why?, duz
- Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?, Dirk Laurie
- Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?, Andrew Starks
- Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?, steve donovan
- Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?, Dirk Zoller