lua-users home
lua-l archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Well, not quite. :)

My current Perl work may have a bright ending, after all. :) No matter what I do, Perl scripts are nevertheless 5x or so slower than Lua (hopefully I'll prove myself wrong; that would mean I've become a Good Perl Pandit).

If this is so, it certainly is reason for any manager to think twice. Such scripts can run for hours, or you can think in terms of the number of machines executing them. In short, Lua Saves Electricity! :)

(Any loss of focus in my mails from now on, shall be blamed on reading the Camel book. It jumps around. :)


Jerome Vuarand kirjoitti 20.9.2006 kello 21.42:

Topic changed, I changed the mail title :)

In my opinion, syntax doesn't matter much. It matters in small companies and projects for the reason that it's easier to find C programmers than
smart programmers that could learn a new language.

But on a wider scale, Lua has no chance against Javascript in big
corporations, and the simple reason is that there is no internationnal
standard defining Lua. Javascript is defined by ECMA.

It's a rather general human tendancy to trust only what is alike
(there's even a name for it but it would certainly start a flame war).
Big corporations only trust big corporations. For that reason anything
not coming from ISO, ECMA, or another consortium/expert group/ industrial
association cannot have a chance. The people who decide in those
companies do not have the slightiest clue about what is good or not on a
technical point of view.

So when you mix incompetent technical directors/programming leads with
big-company style management, rational arguments can't win.

My 2 cents :-)