Re: risks of lua fork?

["steve donovan" <steve.j.donovan@...>]

On 10/29/07, Grellier, Thierry <t-grellier@ti.com> wrote:
> -          They have reached the point where they have no idea which feature
> needs to be introduced.
>
> -          They worry about the core not the libraries (very worrying: how
> to make a full language then?)
>
> -          They want to keep slow release pace
>
> -          Acknowledged that Lua has a single maintainer
>

Sounds fine to me; Lua is the basic core, runnable on just about
anything. Also, there has been a _lot_ of change even going from 5.0
to 5.1 (I still miss implicit pairs() in for loops) and there is
plenty to  be done and explored.  Stability is a fine thing; is it
true that the popularity of a language is driven by the number of
releases?

As for libraries, well we can write those ;)  It's true we're missing
a semi-official toolkit, but there are lots of add-ons.

steve d.

PS. I am agnostic on the zero-based versus one-based question.