tech-userlevel archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Userland Lua - concerns with require

Am 28.10.10 23:34, schrieb Joerg Sonnenberger:

> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 11:28:34PM +0200, Marc Balmer wrote:
>> Am 28.10.10 11:57, schrieb Joerg Sonnenberger:
>>> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 09:21:36AM +0200, Marc Balmer wrote:
>>>> After considerations, email exchange with the makers of Lua, and testing
>>>> realword systems I think probably the best thing to do is to move the
>>>> '.' parts to the end of the list:
>>> [snip]
>>>> I am a bit hesitant right now to remove the '.' entries completely, I am
>>>> still trying to assess the consequences.  That said, I am open for (well
>>>> reasoned) opinions.
>>> How does the Lua loader deal with programs that call chdir(2) before loading
>>> further modules? That's a practical issue especially for system
>>> software.
>> You mean if '.' in the path refers to the CWD that was in place when the
>> software or to the CWD after the chdir(2) call?
> Yes. Is the LUA_PATH processing invariant under chdir operations?

Lua evaulates the paths when 'require' is executed.  If the host program
does a chdir(2), '.' refers to the new working directory, afaict.  (see
loadlib.c in the Lua source distribution)

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index