lua-users home
lua-l archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

2011/5/17 Isaac Gouy <>:
>> Exclusion of LuJIT is very unfortunate
> Was inclusion of beta LuaJIT for the last 5 years very fortunate? ;-)

Why you should think it was not fortunate ?

LuaJIT1 is stable since a long time now and the awesome LuaJIT2 is in
beta but it is working very well on the main supported platforms. For
sure, a first release will come, soon or later but the quality of the
beta is very good.

The inclusion of LuaJIT was actually very fortunate in my point of
view because it was showing the outstanding performance of a specific
Lua implementation. That was very interesting from the technical point
of view and it is related to both the exceptional technical skills of
Mike Pall, his work and the excellent design of Lua as a programming

>> Well, arbitrary decisions are what they are -- arbitrary decisions
> Are you talking about the previous inclusion of LuaJIT? :-)

and what about ATS, the programming language that nobody uses, that
does not even have a real compiler (it does generate C code) and with
all the samples of code written by a single person (the maintainer of
the ATS compiler) ?

Why the custom memory allocator was rejected for the binary tree
application ? That was proposed many times for C and it seems that
there was no logical explication for the ban.

Yes, the choices of the computer benchmark game are pretty arbitrary.

I've remarked the absence of LuaJIT since quite some time but I didn't
think it was worth to mention that.

The performance of LuaJIT stands out on its own and its exclusion form
the game is not really a problem.