[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: 5.1: LUA_VERSION_NUM
- From: Peter Kümmel <syntheticpp@...>
- Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2005 16:57:49 +0200
Philippe Lhoste wrote:
Peter Kümmel wrote:
#define LUA_VERSION "Lua 5.1 (alpha)"
#define LUA_VERSION_NUM 501
501 reads like 5.01, isn't 510 the
The latest versions of Lua 5.0 is 5.0.1, not 5.01.
As I know the latest version is 5.0.2, and here we talk
about the alpha, with the version number 5.1 or 5.1.0 .
correct dotless number for 5.10?
We are not yet at 5.10, let's have 5.1, then 5.2, 5.3... 5.9 before...
IMHO, one great mistake about version numbers is to see them as float
Microsoft uses officially four numbers in versions, something like
220.127.116.11: major, minor, bugfix release and build number or something
along these lines.
Yet, they goofed, releasing a Windows 3.11 (for Workgroups) after 3.1,
without versions 3.2, ... 3.10.
It probably didn't helped against the confusion.
Of course, since that's mostly a convention, nothing prevent you to use
whatever notation that fits you, but I believe the multi-dot notation is
used in many open source projects.
You are right, I forgot the dot.
Does 501 mean 5.01.00? So the version number of 5.0.2 (5.00.02)
should be 50002.
If there will be a first bug fix of 5.1 with the number 5.1.1, then
it will have the number 50101, am I right.
Following this convention, LUA_VERSION_NUM of the current alpha should
be 50100 thus you can check for newer versions (if you add LUA_VERSION_NUM
to older versions of lua):
#if LUA_VERSION_NUM > 50002 (this does not work with the actual value 501)