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

[gary ng <garyng2000@...>]

--- Stephen Kellett <lua@objmedia.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> You may think that. But, for the list item to which
> I replied, you are 
> mistaken. If you doubt me, check the list (I just
> have). It may be you 
> said that in a different posting, which I had not
> read at the time of my 
> reply.
> 
> What you wrote is shown above, you said "integrated
> with .Net". You even 
> mentioned ASP.Net as well. You can't have .Net
> support without the 
> issues I mentioned. Hence I raised it as an issue.
> 
My initial question(in full below)

It started out as a one question: is it lua5.1.dll or
lua51.dll. I didn't explicitly say 'BE PREPARED' but I
thought that is pretty clear and explained why I what
to know the answer(lua.5.1.dll vs lua51.dll).

================================
a quick question:

does it use lua5.1.dll or lua51.dll ?

The reason I ask is that when trying to run
luainterface(not 2.0 but 1.5.3 which allows using the
full range of C modules), I have problem making it
works with luabinaries(because of the name lua5.1.dll)

I need to compile lua 5.1.3 from source and use
lua51.dll instead.

Yes, I did try to modify the c# source to have it load
lua5.1.dll instead but some how it doesn't like it.

Given that this is a windows distro, I think having it
integrated with .NET would be nice(and may be a
requested feature in the future), think ASP.NET using
lua as the engine instead of C#/VB.NET(well there is
still some gluing needed).
=====================================================