You can shorten your for-loop and save a few spaces on the numerical constants. Also, I don't think the rules require you to call your function in the end.

local function f()if true then for v=0,0 do while false do break end repeat until""and""or not nil end elseif""then else end goto l::l::return end

You can shorten your for-loop

No, I can't. Shortening it the way you did results in omitting the in keyword. This obviously goes against the rule of including all language keywords.

and save a few spaces on the numerical constants

Yes, that's true. I will edit my answer. Thanks (again) for pointing this out!

Also, I don't think the rules require you to call your function in the end.

Maybe you are right. But, again, the rules require the program to compile (i.e. no syntax errors) and to run without runtime errors or crashes. In Lua, you can define a syntactically-correct and at the same time buggy function without calling it and the interpreter won't complain.

Oh oops, you're right, I completely overlooked in. Still, the for-loop could be shortened to something sneaky like

for x in print do end

If your function never runs, then clearly it won't have a runtime error :)

orthoplex‭ You are right! It can be shortened (and it prints nil nil). Strange how I missed this one out. Anyways, thanks (once more) for pointing this out!

If your function never runs, then clearly it won't have a runtime error :)

Moshi‭ So calling f() is not necessary... If so, I will remove it.

How about we use our own function to shorten the for-loop even more? This should also relieve your discomfort with not calling f.

local function f()goto l::l::return end
for _ in f do end
if true and false then elseif""then else end
repeat until""or not nil
while""do break end

Clever solution! Thanks!