[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Unique directions for Lua?
- From: "wuerchj" <miwa@<a href="/cgi-bin/echo.cgi?miwasoft.com">...</a>>
- Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 20:10:44 -0000
--- In lua-l@y..., CRIBBSJ <CRIBBSJ@o...> wrote:
> IMHO, it would make more sense to compare Lua to Tcl, not Python
> Perl. Python is know for its "batteries" included philosophy.
> just ... bloated (not that that's horrible; you can get A LOT done
> Perl). Tcl, on the other hand, is still relatively lean and
> being a successor to Tcl. Of course, I hold Tcl in a lot higher
> than a lot of people do. :)
True, I would agree with you that Tcl is probably a better thing to
compare it with. And we hold opposite views on Tcl ;) (I'm in the
process of convincing developers on other products here to offer Lua
instead of Tcl as the embedded scripting language, and these
products are for developing embedded control systems)
> By the way, in response to your statement above, there are a lot
> people on this list who could care less about the discussions
> have about Lua's embedded capabilities. :) I think Lua is a
> enough language to satisfy both camps.
Also agreed. I should proof my posts before sending to keep this in