Re: [ANN] Lua For Windows v5.1.3.3 Public Alpha2 released

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

Ah, but to Windows people it is completely logical to click on
something to run it. Granted, this isn't so cool with traditional
command-line apps, but there is a Windows Lua executable which doesn't
have a console, and expects that all user interaction go through
dialogs, etc (like the cscript/wscript distinction in WSH; hence the
extension .wlua). Or such a program could update a file, database etc
without needing to flash an ugly black console box.

Remember, we are dealing with users who are scared of command-line
prompts. Yes, I know, they should get with the program, but one can't
_force_ an alien paradigm on users.

steve d.

On Tue, May 20, 2008 at 4:10 AM, gary ng <garyng2000@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- Jeff Pohlmeyer <yetanothergeek@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I tend to agree with this, double-clicking on a Lua
>> script
>> should not put an inexperienced user at the mercy of
>> the
>> script's author. If anything, the default action
>> should
>> be to open the file in the Lua editor-of-choice.
>>
>> Possibly you could add a context-menu item for
>> "Execute"
>> but I don't think it should be the default action.
> Ideally, there should be an GUI editor that can also
> 'execute' the current buffer to associate the above
> 'double click means edit' action.
>
> Creating a command line window shortcut(like what VC
> does) with the proper path set is more than enough for
> the installer. This also allows multiple installation
> to live happily together.
>
> Afterall, scripting language is still heavily command
> line oriented.
>
>
>
>