[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Unique directions for Lua?
- From: David <dcuny@...>
- Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 02:57:36 -0800
>From the perspective of a Clueless Newbie, my goal is to be able to download
Lua and be able to use it as a "general-purpose, stand-alone language." I can
do that with the 'core' Lua - the binary is available for Linux and Windows,
and it runs great.
The situation is less good when dealing with other libraries. I'll pick on
glLua only because it's the one I tried. It had makefiles for Windows, but
only the MSVC compiler, which didn't work with my Borland compiler. I
struggled with it for a couple days, and then threw up my hands.
So for the Clueless Newbie, compiling represents a perhaps insumountable
hurdle. Even if they are using Linux, that's no guarantee that they have the
slightest idea what
means. So, assuming that you didn't want to lose the Clueless Newbies (a big
assumption, I know), how could this hurdle be removed?
At a minimum, libraries could be supplied with compiled versions. This would
greatly lower the hurdle. But what if I wanted to use glLua with curlLua?
Creating these libraries as linkable libraries would be even nicer, since I
could (in theory) pick and choose the libraries that I wanted to use. On the
other hand, who's going to maintain this library? (Don't look at me!)
Another option would be to create a bloated, version of Lua with enough
features to make Clueless Newbies reasonably happy: OpenGL, GLUT, BSD style
sockets, OpenAL, stdio.h...
Nah, that would never happen:
-- David Cuny