Re: ... efficiency (was Re: class implementation)
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: ... efficiency (was Re: class implementation)
- From: Diego Nehab <diego@...>
- Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 15:19:30 -0400 (EDT)
Hi,
1. #... should be the same as select( '#', ... ) but should be able to avoid
copying the values around.
2. ...[ j ] should be the same as ( select( j, ... ) ) but again bypassing
the need to copy values around.
I would second that, but this will certainly bring back the discussion
about tupples.
One would expect to be able to do something like this:
1. #(a, b, c)
2. (a, b, c)[2]
Not sure if it is possible to work this syntax out without introducing
ambiguities.
While we are at it, anyone thought about having ... as an "l-value"?
function capture(s, pat)
local i, j, ... = string.find(s, pat)
return ...
end
Regards,
Diego.