John Hind wrote: >>> Would Roberto maybe admit that if he was redesigning Lua from scratch >>> today variables would be local by default and global by declaration? >>> If not, why not? > >> No. It is simply wrong. > > Why? It seems to me that, with lexically scoped local variables, the use > of Globals other than for extending or customising the language or > publishing libraries is lazy and should always be something the > programmer has to think about and justify. [...] Actually, I think he was talking about local-by-default being wrong, which I heartily agree with --- local-by-default is horrible and evil. Global-by-default I also think is wrong, but I can live with it: it's not actually evil. The preferred option is neither-by-default, where variables must be explicitly declared. There are a number of hacks to allow this on Lua with varying degrees of success that don't require any changes to the underlying language semantics. -- +- David Given --McQ-+ "Wizards get cranky, / Dark days dawn, / Riders | dg@cowlark.com | smell manky, / The road goes on. / Omens are | (dg@tao-group.com) | lowering, / Elves go West; / The Shire needs +- www.cowlark.com --+ scouring, / You may as well quest." - John M. Ford
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature