On Tue, 22 Dec 2020 at 18:15, Hans Hagen <j.ha...@xs4all.nl> wrote: > > On 12/22/2020 6:57 PM, Neven Sajko wrote: > > Oops, I forgot to attach the scriptlet before. > > > > > >> [...] I guess it could also be more performant, because Lua would > >> conceivably spend less time managing huge tables. > > > > Now that I think about this some more, it doesn't actually make sense. > > However I'm still interested in whether it is really necessary to have > > that many globals exposed. > most of what you see in that generated file is either unicode data or > font resources ... all needed (and geared for performance)
OK, now that I think just about the real global variables (instead of the "recursive" globals): would it make sense to transfer all the non-Lua-default globals into two tables, one for Lua(Meta)Tex, and another table for ConTeXt, so those would be the only two additional global variables? I'm not proposing you do it, since it seems like it could be a lot of work, I'm just wondering what you think about that, because it seems like things would be much tidier like that (less chance of accidentally accessing a global in Lua code, etc.). Thanks, Neven ___________________________________________________________________________________ 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 ___________________________________________________________________________________
