lua-users home
lua-l archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

On 28 September 2013 12:50, Justin Cormack <> wrote:
> On 28 Sep 2013 01:05, "Ignacio Burgueño" <> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 7:00 AM, Justin Cormack
>> <> wrote:
>>> The poll was what we use not what we would like to use. I would like to
>>> use LR but it used to not work in my setup and now it does there is the
>>> LuaJIT issue with it.
>>> Not to say that there should not always be an easy manual route.
>>> Justin
>> Justin, what is that issue with LuaJIT that you mention?
> The one about things that use LuaJIT ffi and therefore are not compatible,
> plus the partial 5.2 compatibility.

I've used modules installed via LuaRocks with LuaJIT with no problems.

The only open matters related to LR and LuaJIT I see are:

* there are no (AFAIK) modules that are LuaJIT-only in the main rocks
server. Nothing stops one from making an alternative rocks server with
LuaJIT-only rocks. If there is demand I could host that at too, but I don't recall receiving any rockspecs for
ffi-based rocks, even though they were never disencouraged.
* there is a magic dependency "lua" you can use in your rocks to
specify 5.1 and/or 5.2, but there is no "luajit" magic dep (this could
be added), nor a way to say "lua ~> 5.2 or luajit ~> 2" (this can't be
added right now because it's new syntax and would break rockspec
* even though LuaJIT presents itself as Lua 5.1, it has as you said
partial 5.2 compatibility, so there are probably rocks that require
"lua ~> 5.2" and would work on LuaJIT, but LR doesn't know about that
(and figuring out which rocks are LuaJIT-compatible is not reliably

I'd be happy to make any necessary adaptations to make LR play well
with LuaJIT, if there's interest, but I haven't heard much about
LuaJIT in the LuaRocks mailing list.

-- Hisham