Re: Status of lposix?

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

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Joshua Jensen
<jjensen@workspacewhiz.com> wrote:
> Is there a precedent for this?  Has an external module been endorsed by the
> list and then by the Lua authors?

They don't regard it as their job. They do the kernel, we do the userland ;)

> Case in point: I was looking at luaproc the other day, as I currently use
> Lua Lanes (and before that, I used another one).  I discovered many
> similarities and some differences.  That's not the point, though.  When
> luaproc came out, there was one posting
> (http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2009-02/msg00404.html) that implied that a
> de-facto standard can only come from a Lua author.

But the authors themselves would never make such a claim.

It's more a symptom of people wanting there to be standards so that
there is less energy spent on choices.

What more concerns me is that there's a lot of overlap.  lfs does its
job, but then why must luaex and lposix then duplicate functionality
found in that library? It confuses matters.  Where luaex shines is
process creation and control, it should probably stick to that.

steve d.