RE: Unique directions for Lua?

[Enrico Colombini <erix@...>]

>And when I use the word embedded, I'm talking about embedded 
>systems-- not just embedding Lua into a larger application.  
>And that's a world that I think a lot of people don't really appreciate.

I think I can appreciate it: I used to design industrial applications with
a KIM-1, i.e. an 8-bit 6502 and (in the beginning) 1 KB of RAM, using a
pencil-and paper assembler :-)

Lua, in a sense, has a problem: it is too good and versatile, so different
people would like it to evolve in different directions: a scripting
language, a general-purpose full-fledged language, a specialized embedded
language, and so on (BTW, I plan to use it on all these fronts).

My 0.05 Euro: Lua should stay exactly as it is: essential, elegant, compact
and flexible. There is no point in having it become just like another
existing language.

Of course I'd welcome specialized, derived languages like a "microLua" for
small embedded systems, as long as their development is distinct from that
of Lua proper.

  Enrico