undefined | Better HN

0 pointsHiPhish1mo ago0 comments

> There is nothing stopping you from doing someArray[0] = "the first item", you know.

Yes, there is:

    local l = {[0] = 'a', [1] = 'b', [2] = 'c'}
    for i, c in ipairs(l) do
        print(i, c)
    end

This will only print the last two pairs. Lua is 1-indexed, end of story. You can store values at index zero, but it's no different than storing values at index -1 or index 'lolrofl'. It does not exist in the array-part of the table as far as Lua is concerned.

0 comments

rigonkulous1mo ago

If you're going to use a table as an array, use it as an array:

    local l = {[0] = 'a', [1] = 'b', [2] = 'c'}
    for i = 0,#l do
      print(l[i])
    end

    .. prints:

    a
    b
    c

Lua haters usually don't get past their misunderstanding of tables, but its really quite unfair on the language and those who have used it quite well to do big things ..

0x3444ac531mo ago

I've always assumed that there is some technical reason for Lua being 1 indexed, rather than it being a design choice.

Either way, I think it's a nitpick to complain about. I've written a decent amount of Lua and there's only been a handful of times where 1-indexing was even relevant to me.

ModernMech1mo ago

It's a design choice. Lua was first intended to be a configuration language for engineers to enter data at an oil company. They were used to the 1st thing being number 1, the 2nd thing being number 2, and so forth. It's just a very natural way of counting.

You don't change something like that because it eventually got picked up by game programmers (never the intent of Lua, something that just happened after it was used by the Grim Fandango team, then it took off in the gaming world).

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse