On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 5:16 AM, Tim Mensch <
tim-lua-l@bitgems.com> wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I'm starting to realize why there are always a stream of "don't use
> automatic bindings" messages every time someone asks what automatic
> bindings are decent. There seem to be serious downsides to all of them. :(
>
> I finally dug into several that seemed appropriate for the project I'm
> working on, and found serious problems with each one. If anyone is
> interested in my findings, I posted them in a blog entry [1].
>
> I also linked to that entry from [2], so that my analysis might be
> useful to someone in the future who's trying to make a similar decision.
>
> I think the right answer for a light, general purpose Lua binding would
> be close to tolua++ in design, but with a cleaner parser and support for
> a few things that tolua++ is missing (like smart pointers, which I
> mentioned in another message). Oh, and any kind of support would be nice
> as well -- I barely got a response when asking about tolua++ here, and
> the contact email on the tolua++ page bounces :(.
>
> Tim
>
> [1]
http://realmensch.org/blog/fun-lua-bindings
> [2]
http://lua-users.org/wiki/BindingCodeToLua
>
>
