 |
lua-l archive |
|
|
||
|
Graham Wakefield wrote:
In case you weren't aware, Motion (and FCP) already have a scripting language (FxScript), though it's not interactive as far as I know, and certainly can't run in a browser.
I know that such powerful applications are likely to have such programmability features. I was more concerned about barriers to entry on the browser side, since a brower-based plugin was stipulated. On the application side, you can have very complex operations that are easy to script to your heart's content. But for a plugin player, what you can achieve in the application is constrained by the player. Is it possible to write a player that does things better than people who are producing video streams, where there are little or no adoption barriers?
I was looking at the issue from the standpoint of an ordinary consumer, not a Lua enthusiast. To the former, Lua is just another scripting language. But if those proposing this project has the resources to pull it off, then by all means, the choice is theirs. Or if you manage to sell this idea to a VC manager, better still.
Anyway, this is beginning to go way off-topic, that's why I stopped discussing it. I'll believe it when I see it. :-)
On Mar 3, 2007, at 4:23 AM, Kein-Hong Man wrote:Andy Stark wrote:Lua list <lua@bazar2.conectiva.com.br> writes: [snip snip] Far from being limited, I would say that this actually lowers the entry level since you are effectively writing your own effects plug-ins but using Lua rather than a complex C/C++ API.I stand corrected. Sounds very ambitious, though. Good luck all the same. --Cheers, Kein-Hong Man (esq.) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
-- Cheers, Kein-Hong Man (esq.) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia