Re: Unique directions for Lua?

[Tom Wrensch <twrensch@...>]

On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, wuerchj wrote:

> (forwarded on due to accidental private reply)
> 
>  I've already voiced my opinion that amassing a large set of standard
> > modules for Lua (ala Perl, Python, Ruby, etc) is a wasted effort. 
> One
> > motivation for that thought is that once Lua had exceptions, a
> > class-esq system, and a bunch of modules, it would largly be the 
> same
> > as all those other systems, and it's just silly wheel-reinventing 
> IMO,
> > to have so many similar systems.

But many of us *do* care about it, though I agree with you insofar as
those discussions should be in the context of size, speed, and
ease-of-use. (This last is a major selling point of Lua as far as I'm
concerned, though it usually is only mentioned in terms of how simple the
language is).


> > Some examples of items discussed on the list which might be useful
> > additions include:
> > 
> >  1) Memory management optimizations for small memory for embedded 
> use
> >  2) More real-time Garbage collection optimizations for lowering 
> >     collection pause time (as it seems Lua has been picked up among
> >     Game programmers)
> >  3) code-safety features such as "require variable declarations" or
> >     static typing (ala unrealscript)
> >  4) compiling Lua code into C 
> 

I agree on 1 & 2, though I'm uncertain that 3 can be done without making
Lua something it is not. I admit I've never used unrealscript. It looks
like 4 isn't that tough, just needs someone who understands the internals
of Lua and has a free week or two. Of course finding such a person might
be a bit difficult.

  - Tom Wrensch