[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: [ANN] Idle Script - pre-alpha release
- From: Thomas Lauer <thomas.lauer@...>
- Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 15:51:19 +0100
Michael Broughton <email@example.com> wrote:
> Thomas Lauer wrote:
> > You know your way around, know how to deal with a .lua script that seems
> > to have a bug but is in fact correct Idle. So for you, this small
> > difference is not a big deal.
> What if one of your users decides they need an extension which is not
> already supported in Idle?
The sort of user I am (mostly) imagining will not normally have this
specific problem. Of course, I may be completely wrong and if they have,
there are some possibilities:
* if the extension is of general interest (always good for lengthy
debates, this question), I might include it in the core.
* someone else might (have) include(d) it.
* and anyway, if the extension works with Lua there is a good chance
that it'll work with Idle as well. There will be some tweaks required
but it should work in the end.
> You can see how this kind of thing might lead
> to the same issue, no? Thus, you are not actually solving the problem.
Idle was probably not designed to solve this problem (I say probably,
because I am not too sure what problem you're talking about).
It is there to solve one specific -- I might even say narrow -- problem
I was having. And it does that (more or less, currently). It may help
other people with similar requirements. Simple as that.
It will not and cannot solve all problems.
> Why not take advantage of this? It seems like everything you are trying
> to do here is in competition with Lua (I realize this is probably not
> your intention), when you really should be working with Lua.
Good grief. But sure, that's one way of seeing it. Just ignore Idle
then... the world is such a big place.
(Hey, this reminds me of 'This town ain't big enough for the two of us',
old Sparks hit... early 70s or so. Haven't thought of that one for
> > In an ideal world, I'd do just that. But Idle is for real people who
> > want something simple but powerful. Given that most real people have a
> > strained relationship with user manuals and documentation I just think
> > that this approach won't work well in the long run. A user who's faced
> > with a completely new language probably doesn't want to search bits and
> > pieces of the manuals from here and there.
> This sounds like it will be a pain in the butt to maintain.
Fortunately, Lua is pretty stable these days. (That's actually one of
the things that gave me the confidence that such a project might be
But yeah, in a way I do agree, there will be some pain. However, as long
as it's my butt that's doing all the hurting that's okay... my father
has seen to that. (Not that you get the wrong impression: when I was a
child a good whacking every now and then was not unheard (literally)
web : http://thomaslauer.com/start