lua-users home
lua-l archive

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

Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo <> wrote:

>> But that isn't Lua. That isn't the Lua standard libraries, as
>> defined by the reference manual.
>> That's just a Lua fork.
> No, it's not a Lua fork.  
> The FAQ at says:
> 	1.7 - What do I call software derived from Lua?
> 	[...] If the syntax and the semantics of the language (that
> 	is, the parser and the virtual machine) remain the same,
> 	then the language is still Lua. If you simply add new
> 	libraries, or even replace the standard Lua libraries with
> 	your own libraries, the language is still the same, and you
> 	don't need to (and probably shouldn't) give it a completely
> 	different name.

Wikipedia defines a fork as follows:

"In software engineering, a project fork happens when developers take a copy
of source code from one software package and start independent development
on it, creating a distinct and separate piece of software."

My custom variant of Lua makes some very significant changes to the original
language so I would definitely call it a fork. However, in your view if Soni
made a copy of Lua and did not change the language itself, but rather only
the libraries or other non parser/VM changes that does not count as a fork?
Even if the new libraries offer functionality not present in vanilla Lua?

I suppose this could just be a semtantic difference where your determination
of "fork" is when the language itself is changed, where I thought a fork was
when development occurred by anyone who wasn't the original developers.