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

[gary ng <garyng2000@...>]

--- Stephen Kellett <lua@objmedia.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> 
> 
> gary ng wrote:
> > That is what I am curious about and don't
> understand
> > where the miscommunication comes from.
> 
>  From this:
> > Though to me, .NET support doesn't mean shipped
> with
> > .NET runtime. 
> 
> Thats the mis-communication right there. .Net
> support implies you need 
> the .Net runtime. How can you support something on a
> machine that 
> doesn't have .Net installed on it?
> 
> Because you can't, that implies if you want .Net
> support, you are going 
> to have to ensure the runtime is installed if it
> isn't already present.
Does that mean if I said "I want to see lua support
windows, I need to ship Windows with Lua" ? Or that if
my app requires supports tomcat 5.5, 6.0, I have to
ship tomcat with it ?

Just to avoid further mis-communication, I am not
arguing for arguing's sake but genuinely can't link
'support .NET' means shipped with .NET runtime. Or
support Java means ships with java runtime. 

> 
> You may disagree, but the many vendors that do ship
> .Net applications 
> appear to have reached the same conclusion that I
> have. 
Yet there are many vendors state very clearly that
their apps have pre-requist of java/.net and provide a
link to the runtime. And that is 'require', different
from 'support .NET' but 'Need .NET'.

To me 'support' means 'if you have .NET, you can load
lua by ...' but that is quite different from 'You must
have .NET' in order to run lua.