Re: Explicitly warn about lua_next missing an order guarantee in the reference manual
Javier Guerra Giraldez <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.lua.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAFkDaoSJPGGds4cKjSobSZcb37Hzmt=jqMVH0O3+E5JR3Mo23A@mail.gmail.com> |
On Wed, 15 Apr 2026 at 19:00, 'Sainan' via lua-l <[email protected]> wrote: > > The order in which the indices are enumerated is not specified, even for > numeric indices. > > Well, the order is guaranteed for numeric indecies, as long as those > numeric indecies start at 1 and increment from there. :^) only if the numeric indices are actually in the non-guaranteed array part (which is an optimisation and not part of the spec) and only for the current implementation (and all implementations so far that share that specific array-part optimisation) it's easy to imagine a new implementation that goes through the array part in reverse order, and possibly do the hash part before the array. that would be just as spec-compliant as the current one and would break all that code that depends on the enumeration order. -- Javier -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lua-l" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lua-l/CAFkDaoSJPGGds4cKjSobSZcb37Hzmt%3DjqMVH0O3%2BE5JR3Mo23A%40mail.gmail.com.