[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Two types of Lua programmer, or two types of Lua code?
- From: Daurnimator <quae@...>
- Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:31:12 +1100
On 25 February 2016 at 19:18, Dirk Laurie <email@example.com> wrote:
> I have the perception that >90% of the rocks available on the primary
> repository provide modules and <10% provide applications, and the
> suspicion that 10% is a very generous estimate.
> Yet I find it hard to believe that 90% of the time of a typical Lua
> programmer is spent in developing tools and 10% in developing
> I can think of several possible explanations.
> 1. Many of those modules are really stripped-down applications.
> Just wrap them with I/O or a GUI, and presto!
This is a good thing!
All good applications are just wrappers around a library.
> 2. Most of what we really do is confidential and can't be shared.
I'm sort of up this alley with my $DAYJOB.
I try to release all the lua libraries I can that aren't "secret sauce".
> 3. We are prepared to polish and document our tools but the
> effort is just too much for the application.
The lack of documentation for released libraries suggests this isn't a
common path of reasoning.
> 4. We just don't think anybody else would be interested in the
Sort of; see below.
> 5. The whole way that LuaRocks is structured encourages the
> module approach to the point that nothing else really fits.
Not at all IMO.
See the various tools that are installed via luarocks; ones I use
daily: busted, luacheck.
I think there is another category: people write single use scripts and utilities
e.g. converting files, data processing, personal automation.
For these applications, you often need to build a library to operate
with the device or create a binding to a library, which deserves to be
but the application is dead code the minute it is written.