lua-users home
lua-l archive

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

On 6/3/2011 9:36 PM, Xavier Wang wrote:
2011/6/2 Rob Kendrick
    On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 05:03:41PM +0800, Xavier Wang wrote:
     > 2011/6/2 steve donovan
     > > On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Xavier Wang wrote:
     > > > Does LuaJIT planned to support load/dump bytecode? and
    When? I just can't
     > > > find this in LuaJIT roadmap 2011
     > >
     > > Mike P does not regard it as an important priority.
     > >
     > > The question is: do your tests show that this phone is
    too slow to
     > > load the Lua directly?

     > maybe I need to have a try :) but, do you think it's
    appropriate to put
     > plain script text in a game release?

    Sure, why shouldn't it be?  If you're actually worried, through it
    through something like LuaSrcDiet or one of the other source
    compressors; their output is often smaller than luac's anyway.

    luac is really only useful if you're running Lua where there is so
    little space you can't include the compiler.  It does not
    solve any
    obfuscation or script size problems at all.


I have tried LuaSrcDiet, thats great, but can't solve my problem
completely: It changed the code info e.g. line number, it makes
debug difficult. .luac file will hold file information such as
line number, variable name etc. but they are dropped by LuaSrcDiet.

Arf arf, read the LuaSrcDiet options very carefully before you jump to such rubbish conclusions... :-)

You can retain the same line number in LuaSrcDiet by not using the remove excess newlines option.

You can disable local name changing. Then all your identifiers will stay the same. LuaSrcDiet has nothing to do with luac or stripped binary chunks; it *filters* *source* *code* only.

are there any other way to solve this problem? thank you all the same.

Kein-Hong Man (esq.)
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia