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 19:38:27 +0200
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Javier Guerra Giraldez
<javier@guerrag.com> wrote:
> a real tuple type, with destructuring assingments, would solve all
> this in a simple and transparent way.
It's true - we're faking it with varargs. But the cost of elegance
here is efficiency. Like the old joke about Lisp programmers knowing
the value of everything and the cost of nothing.
What I like about Moonscript's destructuring assignments is that you
can never mistake them for regular assignments:
{a,b,c} = t
Explicit is good, and sometimes elegance must take a back seat...
> you're using LuaJIT and Mike's magic banishes all those temporary
> objects from existence)
On a good day ;)
- 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
- Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?, steve donovan
- Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?, Duncan Cross
- Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?, Sean Conner
- Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?, Thiago L.
- Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?, steve donovan
- Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?, Javier Guerra Giraldez