[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Unique directions for Lua?
- From: Tom Wrensch <twrensch@...>
- Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 14:41:50 -0800 (PST)
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.
> > motivation for that thought is that once Lua had exceptions, a
> > class-esq system, and a bunch of modules, it would largly be the
> > as all those other systems, and it's just silly wheel-reinventing
> > 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
> > Some examples of items discussed on the list which might be useful
> > additions include:
> > 1) Memory management optimizations for small memory for embedded
> > 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