Make conf.lua more configuration-like about love HOT 10 CLOSED

Original comment by Bart van Strien (Bitbucket: bartbes, GitHub: bartbes).

Hmm, interesting...

from love.

Original comment by Robin Wellner (Bitbucket: gvx, GitHub: gvx).

So, here is a patch, to show how easy it would be:

diff -r 8c524628753e src/scripts/boot.lua
--- a/src/scripts/boot.lua	Sat Jun 26 19:10:58 2010 +0200
+++ b/src/scripts/boot.lua	Tue Jul 27 11:57:31 2010 +0200
@@ -246,13 +246,13 @@
 
 	-- If config file exists, load it and allow it to update config table.
 	if not love.conf and love.filesystem and love.filesystem.exists("conf.lua") then
-		require("conf.lua")
+		love.conf = setfenv(love.filesystem.load("conf.lua"), c)
 	end
 
 	-- Yes, conf.lua might not exist, but there are other ways of making
 	-- love.conf appear, so we should check for it anyway.
 	if love.conf then
-		local ok, err = pcall(love.conf, c)
+		local ok, err = pcall(love.conf)
 		if not ok then
 			print(err)
 			-- continue

The second change could even be left alone if you want.

Also, this doesn't check for errors in loading conf.lua, but then again, the previous version doesn't either.

from love.

Original comment by Bill Meltsner (Bitbucket: bmelts, GitHub: bmelts).

I don't know how forward-thinking we want to be here, but Lua 5.2 has deprecated setfenv, and assuming that we want to upgrade at some point, it might be prudent to try and figure out an alternative. Maybe.

from love.

Original comment by Bart van Strien (Bitbucket: bartbes, GitHub: bartbes).

It still has some form of function environments, forgot how to do it, but they're no going to remove the setfenv functionality.. I think.

from love.

Original comment by Robin Wellner (Bitbucket: gvx, GitHub: gvx).

IIRC 5.2 has the local _ENV for the environment, so it'll have to set that in some way.

from love.

Original comment by Robin Wellner (Bitbucket: gvx, GitHub: gvx).

Also, I think setfenv is kept in the debug library (which has to be required anyway for the error handler).

from love.

Original comment by Bart van Strien (Bitbucket: bartbes, GitHub: bartbes).

You'd remove some (as far as I know unused) functionality, and lose backwards-compatibility, so, what is the big gain here?

from love.

Original comment by Robin Wellner (Bitbucket: gvx, GitHub: gvx).

Simplicity and easy for lovers.

from love.

Original comment by Bart van Strien (Bitbucket: bartbes, GitHub: bartbes).

On IRC we came to conclusion that we'd leave it how it is. (or at least, I came to that conclusion :P)

from love.

Original comment by Luiji Maryo (Bitbucket: luiji, GitHub: luiji).

Could you please post more information onto why you came to this conclusion, Bartbes?

from love.