LuaJIT 3.0 proposed syntax extensions
An umbrella issue has been opened to discuss syntax extensions for LuaJIT 3.0 and to consolidate related documentation. The discussion seeks constructive feedback on design, semantics, and documentation while emphasizing compatibility and tool support. The goal is to add only proven, non‑ambiguous extensions that improve developer experience without increasing language complexity.
- ▪The issue serves as a central place for proposals and documentation updates on LuaJIT 3.0 syntax extensions.
- ▪Feedback is encouraged to focus on functionality and avoid prolonged debates over cosmetic symbol choices.
- ▪Proposed extensions must improve developer quality‑of‑life, be proven in other languages, avoid ambiguities, preserve backward compatibility, and not hinder tooling.
- ▪The author explicitly states no intention to adopt the syntactic complexity of languages such as Perl, Ruby, C++ or Rust.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page. LuaJIT / LuaJIT Public Notifications You must be signed in to change notification settings Fork 1.2k Star 5.6k Code Issues 46 Pull requests 14 Actions Security and quality 0 Insights Additional navigation options Code Issues Pull requests Actions Security and quality Insights {"payload":{"preloaded_records":{},"structured_data":{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"DiscussionForumPosting","headline":"LuaJIT 3.0 Syntax Extensions","articleBody":"This is an umbrella issue for the LuaJIT 3.0 syntax extensions.\n\nThe documentation will be evolved and updated in the first comment below. [^1]\n\n**Please feel free to discuss the choice, design and semantics of syntax extensions in this issue.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at GitHub.