Using 'parent' as table field should also be reserved?

[Jackzmc]

Apparently pluto now reserves the common word parent, which I don't think is ideal, but checking my code it fails with this vague error when I use not data.parent, removing that and it works fine:

$ plutoc -p jackz_vehicle_builder.lua
D:\Software\pluto\plutoc.exe: syntax error: jackz_vehicle_builder.lua:1462: expected an identifier.
    1462 | if not data.parent and subhandle ~= builder.base.handle then
         | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ here: this needs a name.

Besides the error reason being misleading/vague, is parent part of a field supposed to be reserved as well? I would think local parent would be reserved but not just any <table>.parent

I think that is way too broad of a keyword reservation

[Sainan]

parent has to be reserved for table constructors as otherwise the following would not be valid:

class Entity
	__name = "Entity"
end

class Human extends Entity
	__name = "Human"

	function getHierarchy()
		return { self, parent }
	end
end

local h = new Human()

for h:getHierarchy() as t do
	print(t.__name)
end

As for shorthand accessor syntax, Pluto can remove this restriction: #245