[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: PUC Lua
- From: Dirk Laurie <dpl@...>
- Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 06:35:50 +0200
On Sun, May 08, 2011 at 09:28:45PM +0200, Henning Diedrich wrote:
>
> People like calling the original, 'vanilla' and all kinds of tender names.
> Trying to write neutral stuff, I keep falling back to talk about "Lua" and
> "LuaJIT", which technically makes no sense but intuitively seems to be the
> least confusing and bloated way to make the distinction.
>
If the stuff is technical enough to justify a fine distinction, one should
probably be writing "Lua 5.1", "LuaJIT 2.0" etc. — and then there is no
need to qualify "Lua" any further.
Dirk
