lua-l archive

Search lua-l

This index contains 143,604 documents and 1,774,497 keywords. Last update on 2023-03-08 .

341. Re: Lua 5.1 has a serious issue (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 07:24:52 -0500

Any packager that would apply a modification like that is being irresponsible. I don't think your last point should be considered when deciding this issue. Regards, --John

342. lua_tostring surprise (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Sat, 14 Jan 2006 15:02:34 -0500

Today I was surprised to find that while base lib tostring honors the metatable __tostring field, lua_tostring in the C API doesn't (lua-5.1-rc). This renders __tostring mostly useless. More immediat

343. Re: Lua 5.1 (final,rc) now available (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:04:04 -0500

I second that. Please don't modify your released tarballs-- work, beta, release candidate, or otherwise. Any might get packaged downstream. Consider that package development involves taking a known u

344. [ANN] Lua 5.1 Debian package (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 22:18:50 -0500

With help from Enrico Tassi, I've packaged Lua 5.1 (currently up to the "original" -rc release) for Debian GNU/Linux officially, and it has entered the distribution's unstable archive. For users of S

345. Re: [ANN] Lua 5.1 Debian package (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:17:25 -0500

Sorry for the misunderstanding, I wasn't suggesting that the Lua build rely solely on libtool. It may be worth considering as a make target given the coverage it offers. You cleared up your position

346. Re: [ANN] Lua 5.1 Debian package (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:44:38 -0500

I think it would be best to separate the use of the "lib" prefix naming convention from whether libtool is used or not. If you take a generic approach to creating a Lua library/module, you'll find th

347. Re: [ANN] Lua 5.1 Debian package (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2006 21:56:32 -0500

I've updated the Debian package to the latest -rc source and restored the module paths to the "lua/5.1" form. Attached is some new text in the README regarding module paths. --John Module paths -- Up

348. Re: [ANN] Lua 5.1 Debian package (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 21:01:49 -0500

In the liblua5.1-0-dev package: /usr/lib/liblua5.1.a /usr/lib/liblua5.1.so (symlink) so I don't think this is incompatible with what you say. Note, however, that the .so with the soname number ("libl

349. Re: Is Lua 5.1.1 your next executable?? (Re: [ANN] Lua 5.1 Debian package) (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 07:37:29 -0500

Hi Asko, I think you are misreading what I wrote as far as the Debian packages. Any files in the 5.1.x series will have "5.1" in the name. There will never be "5.1.1" in a file name. The rationale fo

350. Re: Lua 5.1 rc3 now available (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 20:04:14 -0500

I should have noticed this earlier, but the Version field in lua.pc should have the full Lua version (5.1.0) rather than the major version (5.1). According to the pkg-config manual, Version should be

351. Re: Error handling (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 20:50:32 -0500

Unfortunately if any error handler happens to use the C version of the tostring function (lua_tostring) to display the error object, as in the case of the lua command line interpreter for uncaught ex

352. Re: PATCH: Lua 5.1 advanced readline support (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 09:12:19 -0500

This is great, and I guess it would be nice to see it in Lua 5.2 as is, but I'm wondering if we can do something more general. Would it be possible to make this a module? Then we could reference it e

353. Re: PATCH: Lua 5.1 advanced readline support (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 22:17:12 -0500

I think that providing a Lua binding to libreadline is a separate issue. Actually since the library uses globals instead of a context it seems like a bag of worms. I've confirmed that your advanced r

354. Lua environment variables and supporting parallel versions (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 22:34:33 -0500

For Lua packagers: I realized that to support multiple installed versions of Lua, versioned aliases of the Lua environment variables (LUA_INIT, LUA_PATH, and LUA_CPATH) are needed. I propose names as

355. Re: Lua environment variables and supporting parallel versions (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 11:45:35 -0500

Nowhere here am I suggesting a change to Lua's upstream source. There is a difference between the "zen" of Lua itself (which I've argued for on many topics) and the practical matter of meshing Lua's

356. Re: PATCH: Lua 5.1 advanced readline support (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 11:55:35 -0500

Some reasons not to add the patch are: it's not official functionality; it removes the incentive to convince the Lua authors to accept the patch; unless all distro's apply it, users still have an inc

357. Re: [PATCH] shared lib support (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 10:37:59 -0500

There is an "aix" target in the Lua makefile which requires the xlc compiler, but we wouldn't say that the Lua build relies on xlc. Likewise libtool can be made an option without making the build dep

358. Re: test directory (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 23:08:16 -0500

Hi Mike, As it looks simple enough, I'm OK with adding the syntax highlighting to the wiki. There's a small issue with the CSS: the box surrounding the code stops at the right edge of the browser win

359. Re: test directory (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 21:50:16 -0500

See <http://lua-users.org/wiki/WikiFormattingExamples> for an example Lua code block with syntax highlighting. Thanks to Mike for the sample implementation. --John

360. Re: Lua 5.0 and 5.1 together (score: 1)

Author: John Belmonte <john@...>

Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 20:06:46 -0400

Hi Diego, I already tried suggesting this (http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2006-02/msg00461.html). We can get by without the Lua authors making a standard, just as we do regarding versioned names of