Re: What Lua can do that other programming languages can't do?

[Steve Litt <slitt@...>]

On Thu, 7 Mar 2013 09:36:14 +0000
Peter Hickman <peterhickman386@googlemail.com> wrote:

> On 6 March 2013 16:08, Rob Kendrick <rjek@rjek.com> wrote:
> 
> > It's a shame that it appears to be riddled with non-standard
> > extensions to C (specifically, computed goto).  A simple build with
> > clang -std=c89 -pedantic fails due to C++ comments and implicit
> > function declarations.
> >
> > So, it's already harder to embed places than Lua.
> >
> > B.
> >
> >
> Well I will be honest and say that by choice I would embed Lua but I
> have found cases where Ruby code was faster to develop. With Lua I
> tend to find that I have to find or implement features that Ruby will
> give me out of the box, this greatly extends the development time for
> a project. 

Do you mean features the Ruby *language* gives you out of the box, or
features that Ruby *libraries* give you out of the box? If the latter,
then this gets back to the discussion we had a couple weeks ago, with
some people suggesting ways to get the best of both worlds with Lua:

* Just-the-necessity features by default for svelte code
* Easy way to look up, evaluate, and include other features granularly

Thanks,

SteveT

Steve Litt                *  http://www.troubleshooters.com/
Troubleshooting Training  *  Human Performance