3 ms·

I'd agree with you based on the language itself; Lua has some annoying idiosyncrasies like e.g. (my main pet peeve) 1-based indexing. But I suspect the positiv

I'd agree with you based on the language itself; Lua has some annoying idiosyncrasies like e.g. (my main pet peeve) 1-based indexing. But I suspect the positive opinion on Lua stem more from the standardized environment the language is built around (i.e. how it is embedded into applications): If you don't explicitly pass capabilities like file handling etc. into the script, it CANNOT use them. Sooo many scripting languages get this wrong, it's actually embarassing.

MomsAVoxell 2mo ago
1-based indexing is really a lame duck argument - if you can't get past that, you're simply being stubborn. You absolutely can have tables indexed at 0 - what you cannot do, is fail to take responsibility for the use-patterns you apply to those tables, if you do so - and more specifically you have to take responsibility for the requirement that you use 0-based tables, instead of more optimal methods. The table is an extraordinarily flexible type. You will gain immensely from using it properly - whether its the newbie dilemma over pairs()/ipairs(), or whether its the professional metatable manipulations - the power of this type is undeniable. However, if you cannot get past the fact that you must learn it, and that it is applicable to your requirements in every single case, then you are for sure going to have a hard time. Too much power + too little attention to important details = burnt fingers = endless whining. This is my personal stance having used Lua for decades now, professionally and personally, to do amazing things.