[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index] - Subject: Re: A review of changes between 5.1 and 5.2-work3
- From: Jerome Vuarand <jerome.vuarand@...>
- Date: Fri, 21 May 2010 17:19:52 +0200
2010/5/20 Peter Cawley <lua@corsix.org>: > To help understand all of the changes between Lua 5.1(.4) and Lua > 5.2-work3, I took I diff of the source folders of the two, then > distilled the resulting 16000 line diff line into an easier to read > blog post. You may be interested in reading the result (and feedback > is also welcomed): > > http://www.corsix.org/content/look-lua-52-work3 I'm currently reading that very nice and comprehensive article. I have a few questions though. Point 16 specifies that if __gc is set in a metatable after it's been assigned to a userdata won't make it called at collection. If the __gc is present during setmetatable, but is later changed, will the original or the new __gc be called at collection ? Still about the point 16, and the point 23, the latter has the following code snippet : getmetatable(newproxy(true)).__gc = print os.exit(0, true) --> userdata However according to point 16, assigning print to __gc after the creation of the userdata (inside newproxy) shouldn't be registered. So is print really called in that situation (and contradicting point 16) ? Will newproxy be updated to be able to give it a __gc ? Or is it recommended to create a prototype proxy, assign it a __gc, and then clone it (by passing it to newproxy), the clone sharing the metatable and hopefully having its __gc acknowledged ? Also I'm a bit surprised by point 54: luaL_typerror wasn't really a typo, but rather a contraction. It was consistent with luaL_argerror (instead of luaL_argumenterror) in having 3 characters between "luaL_" and "error".
