Re: Features *I* would like to see

["Wesley Smith" <wesley.hoke@...>]

If things are modules, then you don't actually have to use them, embed
them, or load them so the "bloat" argument isn't really valid.

wes

On 8/17/07, Leo M. Cabrera <kixdemp@gmail.com> wrote:
> Are you talking about the networking/multithreading/etc. thingys
> mentioned before?
>
> If so, then, well... That would defeat the purpose of Lua being small,
> and it will get bloated like the .NET Framework did. :-/
>
> I don't use Lua as a primary language, I have C/C++ for that (yes, I am
> a masochist), I use it as a scripting language for games and it's
> meeting my needs so far.
>
> Go Lua! :-D
>
> Graham Wakefield wrote:
> > I would like to second David's comments.
> >
> > A non-ANSI C but highly portable extension of Lua is desirable for
> > many reasons and users.  Having it standardized (blessed, distributed
> > whatever by Lua authors) assists portability and sharing of
> > documentation, support etc.  While it may perhaps seem 'not
> > difficult', it is certainly not easy nor brief, and not every Lua/C
> > programmer can afford to create them directly from scratch.  Pooling
> > such efforts into the previously suggested standard library extension
> > seems to be one of the most useful possible next 'features' of Lua.
> >
> > On Aug 17, 2007, at 5:21 PM, Sherry Zhang wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> They are not provided in ANSI C.
> >> If you want to use these libs, create them yourself directedly from
> >> scratch.
> >> It is not difficult.
> >>
> >> Sherry Zhang
> >>
> >> On 8/18/07, David Burgess <dburgess@gmail.com
> >> <mailto:dburgess@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >>> I think Lua is good language wise. The libs need some work.
> >>>
> >>> Networking, Multitasking Libraries and Luiz's standard library proposal
> >>> would cover it for me.
> >>>
> >>> DB
> >>>
> >
> > grrr waaa
> > www.grahamwakefield.net
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>