Re: Article biased against Lua

[Stefan Reich <stefan.reich.maker.of.eye@...>]

Well I love "hot or not" debates. But that article is clearly pretty
stupid. Scala and Java as scripting languages? Do they even know what
a scripting language is? (I guess they assume JSP is
Java-as-scripting. Well...)

My bet is, someone looked at some statistics sheet (which happened not
to include Lua for whatever reason) and then made up an article to
explain it with almost no content.

In German, we have an expression for that: "He sucked that out of his
fingers" (=wrote it without really using his brain) :)

On a more general note, the reason for Lua's slight lack of publicity
might be its age - and the lack of frantic language updates (which is
rather a good thing). But then again, Lua can certainly be made to
appear fresh again. I try to do that with my project - and people are
taking note. (What, a whole OS for one language? It must be a powerful
one!)

BTW: I am strongly considering handing out a bunch of CDs in public.
Still pondering where and how exactly to do it - there are a number of
interesting options.

Cheers,
Stefan

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 8:40 AM, Pascal Du Maurrier
<pascaldumaurrier@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> A recent article appeared on InfoWorld, about "What's hot, what's not in scripting languages" (http://www.infoworld.com/print/175867).
>
> I was amazed to see that Lua is not included in the list. This seems to be a proof of some bias against Lua, or not? Why is Lua not getting the credit that it deserves?
>
> The glaring omission of Lua from the article is all the more outrageous considering how well placed is Lua in the TIOBE index (http://www.tiobe.com/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html). Also see the "Delta in Position" field that indicates the relative loss/gain of each language: Lua is going strong!
> Lua should have been mentioned in the article as a SUPER hot language. And yet, it was not even included in their list...
>
> I really don't understand the reason!