lua-users home
lua-l archive

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

Stephen Kellett <> wrote:
> Thomas Lauer wrote:
> > (I have a rough-and-tumble version that more or less runs with standard
> > Lua but I just HATE the idea that subtle differences between the way the
> > two binaries do their respective jobs might wreak havoc on unsuspecting
> > users. These things can introduce bugs that are nearly impossible to
> > track down.)
> If you have that version then it seems to me that before you get to V1.0 
> (at which point you wouldn't want to change things) you should put your 
> work into making that version work.

There's in fact not much I can do. I can detail the things that make up
the differences between my binaries (which are at the current early
stage a moving target anyway) and the official Lua binaries.

I think it's a very good thing that the Lua team keeps a firm lid on
changes in the official distribution. That was exactly why I chose to
have a clean break.

> I haven't had a chance to run the Idle binaries past the Lua Validator's 
> from Software Verification - it would be nice if the debug facilities in 
> Lua work with Idle, then idle will have software tool support right from 
> the start.

I'd be amazed if 3rd-party products that work with the Lua binaries
also work with the Idle binaries out-of-the-box. There's a high degree
of external compatibility but internally there are some significant
differences. But I will do whatever I reasonably can do to make this as
compatible as possible on all levels.

cheers  thomasl

web :