Re: Degenerative discussions (maybe he's right?)

[peterhickman <peterhi@...>]

On 28 Dec 2007, at 11:34 , Asko Kauppi wrote:

> Then there's the Lua 2nd tier, modules. These are in more or less  
> constant flux, and there sure is generous overlap, and generous  
> amount of bugs / bad designs in them. Comparisons of keeping up  
> with Lua and Python become essentially the same if the 2nd tier is  
> also included in the concept.

The question of the quality of the non core modules is valid but not  
actually a Lua/Roberto problem. It is more a community problem, I  
would like to see a nice centralised modules archive but given that  
Lua is used in such a wide variety of environments I'm not too sure  
just how useful this would be to everybody.

I've always seen CPAN as Perl's biggest ally but it has not held any  
other language back by not having an equivalent system.

The quality of the modules is the responsibility of the individual  
authors and the people that use them. What helps with Perl is POD and  
tests, by having a standard framework for these things anyone can add  
to the documentation and tests - providing the author is willing to  
accept updates.

Now a standard Lua test framework along with documentation standard  
and packaging would, in itself, help with the standards on the non  
core modules.

--
"Dogs bark at what they don't understand." -  Heraclitus