[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Lua OS
- From: steve donovan <steve.j.donovan@...>
- Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 08:57:43 +0200
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 12:29 AM, Steve Litt <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> 2) Lua has comparatively little mindshare, so if you're on a project
> and there's a need to write a script, others are going to champion
> Python or Ruby.
Well, for desktop apps, perhaps, where the size and slowness of these
sexy beasts aren't a problem ;)
Games people however understand that you can have dynamic power
without the whole kitchen sink.
(1) and (2) are related, of course. The documentation thing is very
important, which is why I've devoted so much time to next-generation
documentation tools. Plus better tools - and we're seeing good
progress on that.
Recently Canonical moved a big Python program (Juju) to Go, and in the
process invented a lot of the needed infrastructure. They seem very
pleased with the results.
A similar-sized project in Lua would spawn a lot of useful
infrastructure for other Lua applications, but it would need a sugar
daddy. The Kepler project was a sugar daddy for a while, but
previously-funded open source projects tend to languish. Fortunately,
I can honestly say that my OSS efforts are not funded ;)