Re: binary file portability?

[eugeny gladkih <john@...>]

>>>>> "RK" == Rob Kendrick <lua-l@nun.org.uk> writes:

 >> could someone tell me why doesn't Lua have the portable
 >> bytecode? we support x86, amd64, IA64, Sparc 32 and Sparc 64
 >> CPUs, so I have to compile the Lua code for them all. my dream
 >> is only one compilation and new package loader, the loader which
 >> 'll be able to load the code from zip file :)

 RK> Size, simplicity and performance.  It might be nice to have
 RK> a "blessed"

what performance do you speak of? that's mostly a time of disk
I/O. simplicity... it'll take a few lines of a code - maybe 50,
maybe less. the real probles is only the size, the size of string
literals only.

 RK> generic dumper/loader that people can choose to use rather than rolling
 RK> their own changes every time, but the core of Lua itself excludes this
 RK> functionality for those three reasons, IMO.

yep, that's great.

-- 
Yours sincerely, Eugeny.
Doctor Web, Ltd. http://www.drweb.com
+79119997425