Re: Proposal: smartlua

[steve donovan <steve.j.donovan@...>]

On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 8:28 AM, Rena <hyperhacker@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think that's quite how nipples work...

Well, exactly. _Nothing_ is intuitive. I'm thinking of the Einstein
quote about common sense being the collection of prejudices acquired
by the age of eighteen.

However, here we are not starting with a blank slate.  People
understand a 'program' even if they're accustomed to clicking on icons
in the explorer (The smart lua archives would have an extension
'.slua' (say) which would be associated with 'slua.exe' [1], just as
with .jar files)

Hopefully a _programmer_ would not be too scared of the console and
know that 'program arguments' is the explicit incantation. Although
integration into a smart extensible editor like ZeroBrane [2] Studio
is not difficult. So you'd run, debug and generally have a fine time
with a program and then hit 'package' in the menu.

steve d.

[1] There is a complication (there always is with Windows.)  You need
two executables, one for console apps and one for GUI apps. That's why
the wxLua examples in LfW end in '.wlua' - otherwise you get the nasty
black console which upsets people.

[2] The name feels appropriate in this context. (It's become the
official editor of the 'Lua Batteries' distribution)