Re: Question about accessing Lua tables and arrays faster

[Jorge <xxopxe@...>]

On 28/07/13 09:05, Leo Romanoff wrote:
> Which means that LuaJIT jitted and interpreted versions take a second 
> and third place overall. Way ahead of the next competitor. -Leo 

The conclusion I reached stems from this.

You have a very neat language. It lacks nothing and wastes nothing. And 
you get great performance, specially in relation to the hassle-freeness 
and portability of the deployment.

If you need more performance, because you happen to need some esoteric 
stuff (for a scripting language), you do not start spoiling the 
language, but try the JIT compiler. You get tons of performance at the 
cost of having to test for hardware support, checking compiler logs, and 
stuff like that.

And if even then it doesn't have the performance characteristics you 
need, perhaps it was the wrong language to start with.