Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2 [was Re: Location of a package]
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2 [was Re: Location of a package]
- From: "Javier Guerra" <javier@...>
- Date: 2008年2月25日 10:54:58 -0500
On 2/25/08, Hugo Etchegoyen <hetchegoyen@hasar.com> wrote:
>
> I am a fan of 'continue' and I have already advocated for it before. Why
> should you cancel the scope rule? The given example is clearly a programming
> error. Why should programmers be protected from such errors?
ok, so what should be the outcome of that error?
- skip declaration/initialization?
- skip loop test?
- crash and burn?
--
Javier
- References:
- Location of a package, Ignacio Burgueño
- Re: Location of a package, Fabien
- Re: Location of a package, Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: Location of a package, eugeny gladkih
- upcoming changes in Lua 5.2 [was Re: Location of a package], Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2 [was Re: Location of a package], Shmuel Zeigerman
- Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2 [was Re: Location of a package], Roberto Ierusalimschy
- Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2 [was Re: Location of a package], Shmuel Zeigerman
- Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2 [was Re: Location of a package], Javier Guerra
- Re: upcoming changes in Lua 5.2 [was Re: Location of a package], Hugo Etchegoyen