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: duz <duz@...>
- Date: 2014年4月10日 20:46:37 +0200
local a, b, c = t[1]...
No, it's meant to turn "return (h(table,index))" into "return
h(table,index)"
I'm sorry, but I still don't see why it is so important to
throw away any values here. Why is __index it in 2.4 defined to
return (h(table,index))
instead of just
return h(table,index)
which I'd find good uses for.
- 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?, Sean Conner
- Re: __index returns truncated to one, why?, Thiago L.