I'd say that since the issue can be solved naturally and completely within the 
confines of Lua itself, new parameters should not be introduced in HAProxy to 
give one ability to solve it differently while obscuring the solution in 
configuration of the host program, however tempting this might look. 

Just my two cents.


-----Original Message-----
From: Willy Tarreau <w...@1wt.eu> 
Sent: Thursday, January 9, 2020 11:42 AM
To: Tim Düsterhus <t...@bastelstu.be>
Cc: Adis Nezirovic <aneziro...@haproxy.com>; haproxy@formilux.org; 
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MINOR: lua: Add lua-prepend-path configuration option

On Thu, Jan 09, 2020 at 03:00:34PM +0100, Tim Düsterhus wrote:
> However this morning I started thinking whether it might make sense to 
> generalize `lua-prepend-path` to `lua-run-string` that would execute 
> the Lua script given as the parameter. It might provide better 
> flexibility and would be as readable as lua-prepend-path:
> lua-run-string "package.path = package.path .. ';/some/path/?.lua'"
> Opinions?

I'm seeing some merit in this for quite some stuff which annoys us by requiring 
a dedicated file. I'm just a bit anxious about how this can steer from the 
original intent, with users seeing it as a way to inline code anywhere, then 
complaining that we don't have multi-line strings nor 64kB long lines :-/

I'm interested in other opinions on this as well.


Reply via email to