On 12/22/2020 6:36 PM, Neven Sajko wrote:
Hello again,
While learning about how to drive TeX through Lua, I decided to
recursively list all Lua global variables (actually this is traversing
the _G table) in the LMTX environment, half to learn more Lua, half
for getting to know ConTeXt better.
I was quite surprised by the huge size of the environment, a file that
contains the listing of all the globals is 42 MB long! I wonder if it
would be possible to reduce the exposed globals by replacing some of
them by getter and setter-like functions? That seems like it would be
not sure what you refer to but even then you need to 'get' and 'set them
someplace which then involves tables ... it's just a large system and
that won't change
also, when you run such tests, don't include the characters.* tables as
most is data, and of you do it from a tex run you also see fonts and
their data (which then means shared tables too)
much nicer and less error prone - because Lua is so dynamic, polluting
the global namespace seems even more dangerous than in C-like
languages. I guess it could also be more performant, because Lua would
conceivably spend less time managing huge tables.
Wait, you traverse global tablers so their entries are *not* global.
\starttext
\startluacode
context.starttabulate { "|T|T|" }
for k, v in table.sortedhash(_G) do
context.NC() context(type(v)) context.NC() context(k)
context.NC() context.NR()
end
context.stoptabulate()
\stopluacode
\stoptext
These are global. Many come from lua itself, then there are libraries
than come with luametatex. The rest is context specific and again some
are just helper modules. I notices some 6 stray locals that I fixed.
There were also some global variables with suspicious random variation
in values between runs of ConTeXt: I ran my Lua script like so
multiple times (attached, in case someone is interested in it):
context s.lua
rm s.tuc s.pdf s.log
And I found that the values of some variables unpredictably and randomly vary:
Maybe weak tables?
The variable resolvers.suffixmap.lua sometimes has the value
"scripts", and sometimes "lua". I think this means that files with the
file name suffix ".lua" are sometimes classified as general scripts
and sometimes as Lua scripts. This seems like it could even be a bug?
could be but probably more a side effect ... part of that resolver stuff
is there for usage in tds and could be simplified in the meantime .. if
there are hashes they can differ per document
The variables storage.tofmodules and storage.toftables are also
interesting: they vary from run to run like this:
tofmodules: 0.175483 0.149536 0.150493 0.150005
toftables: 0.008407 0.008118 0.008395 0.008116
I'd like to know what is their purpose, if it's not to involved to explain?
timers, so indeed they can differ per run
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
