On Sep 20, 2006, at 10:49 AM, Paul Hudson wrote:
>I REALLY like many things about Lua, mostly its small size and modest goals.
>I really respect its designers for keeping its scope small.
> I even respect them for holding fast to their syntax.
>But it's just a showstopper for a company like Apple and I'm sure we're not the only ones.
It seems odd to say “we can’t use that language because a few of the syntax elements are different”, while the fact that the semantics and much else are different is (seemingly) not a an issue.
You may well be right.
I’d seriously have doubts about a company that determined language acceptability on syntactical issues…. And as others have pointed out, it would mean no Perl, no Python. no Ruby,… which is cutting off your nose to spite your face.
It depends on the use. If someone wants to write a game using Lua, or a file filter using Python, that's great. But when you're presenting something for end users, it has to be familiar. And management in my realm doesn't want to expose those end users to something new. For better or worse I have to agree with this philosophy. So I have to shelf my interest in Lua for the time being, I suppose.
~Chris And now, an important message from Microsoft: