Re: Has Lua reached perfection?

[Paige DePol <lual@...>]

KHMan <keinhong@gmail.com> wrote:

> These days I like "no surprises" and being able to clearly express things
> in code. After all, Lua is not competing in the JIT pedal-to-the-metal
> race, and neither is it going super-linguistic-expressive as in Perl 5.
> I'm not so gung-ho on "minimal" these days.
> 
> So given a choice between "minimal is elegant" and "clear expression of
> ideas", guess what I would choose.

One of the goals I am trying to achieve with Lua++ is to keep the runtime
portion of the code as minimal and as fast as possible. Currently, I have
managed to achieve only a 15% increase in the runtime size, however, the
size of the parser has ballooned up by 233%!

I would like to try to keep a parser-less Lua++ binary size within the
footprint of vanilla Lua as much as I possibly can. A lot of what I have
added to the language happens during parsing, so I don't see the expanded
parser size as a bad thing, if the end goal is to improve performance of
the runtime significantly.

~Paige