Hi all,
Bruce Dodson wrote:
I did a bit of work last night on updating SciTE to use Lua 5.1.1. I will be
looking for testers for this, pretty soon.
I am interested. Some of the Lua exporter scripts I ported from
C/C++ can do with the % operator...
[snip]
While I'm at it does anyone have feedback or preferred behavior with regard to
how packages / modules are handled when you switch buffers? And more
generally, how do people feel about the way global variables are managed
currently? Are there any issues that you have had to work around? If so,
this might be a good time to bring those forward so we can tighten up the
interface.
I don't have any problems with globals currently. I have been
tending to do the following:
(a) large scripts are always in their own files
(b) only functions called by hotkey etc. are exposed as globals
(c) configuration to use the property system
(d) everything else, all non-initialization code, are locals
(e) buffer object is fine for per-buffer state and data
(f) use extman to manage event functions
(extman's userlist code should be updated to support multiple
userlists, though)
So global namespace pollution doesn't seem to be a problem right
now, at least for me. If I use only standard or popular packages,
I don't think I have a real need for multiple package namespaces.
Of course, this is only one data point, so I too am interested in
what others are facing.
The inclusion of MenuCommand was lovely. Haven't used it yet,
though. So, still in my wishlist are roughly:
(a) a way to operate on all buffers for operations that need it
(b) a general pipe system for executing external progs
(c) loading and using shared libraries like LuaSocket
--
Cheers,
Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
_______________________________________________
Scite-interest mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.lyra.org/mailman/listinfo/scite-interest
