[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: RE: PUC Lua
- From: "Michael Newberry" <mnewberry@...>
- Date: Sun, 8 May 2011 21:08:15 -0700
How about just "Lua"? It is up to those who create derivative works to
figure out their own names. It seems to me that Lua from PUC is the one and
only "Lua" and it needs no additional qualifiers.
From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On
Behalf Of HyperHacker
Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2011 7:20 PM
To: Lua mailing list
Subject: Re: PUC Lua
On Sun, May 8, 2011 at 18:29, Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo
>> Well, according to LuaJIT's FAQ :
>> "LuaJIT is compatible to the Lua 5.1 language standard"
>> If this is no longer the case, perhaps Mike will do everybody a favor by
renaming "LuaJIT" to, say, "MikeJIT" and let it become its own thing.
> I don't think renaming as suggested is a good thing for Lua.
> LuaJIT is great tool for running Lua programs.
What's wrong with just saying "vanilla Lua", or adding a note
explaining that "Lua" refers to that?
Sent from my toaster.