Re: Lua distros again

[Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@...>]

2018-02-13 12:46 GMT+02:00 Lorenzo Donati <lorenzodonatibz@tiscali.it>:

> It should seem strange that more general-purpose libraries are /not/ the
> most downloaded ("penlight", "stdlib"), as if people didn't usually use
> those functionalities.

They are very idiosyncratic, in the sense of being tailored to the
predilections of their respective authors. I steal lots of code from
them, but I don't require the libraries themselves.

> Sadly I think this is a direct consequence of Lua team not wanting to
> endorse any specific initiative.
...
> But there is a big "but": not endorsing, say, a charter of committed people
> that took responsibility for creating a basic set of standard library was
> and is a big mistake for the future of Lua, IMO.

Only for Lua as a possible replacement for Python. The future of Lua
lies where the past of Lua also lies, as a scripting language embedded
in an application, not as the backbone of standalone applications.

> Even when thinking about embedding a language in an application, where Lua
> should be first choice, I hear people talking about Python and using Python
> (urgh!)! Sometimes because they don't even know Lua, and sometimes because
> they need better supported libraries, so they rule-out Lua!

I haven't seen anybody suggesting yet that a PyTeX effort like LuaTeX
should be made.

> Utf8 was an ideal candidate for an external library.

It still is. Nothing in the world stops you from loading one. On the other
hand, if all you need is to count characters for the sake of you own-rolled
linewrap utility, the Lua 5.3 libray is adequate.

> Lua team stripped the math library of world-standard hyperbolic functions
> because they were little used (?!?) and they were a simple forwarding to C
> libs. "OK, if you are a C programmer you can re-add them, or you can
> implement them using exp". Sadly who usually needs the optimized C versions
> that map to math processor instructions (scientists) is typically /not/ a C
> programmer, whereas a C programmer rarely uses hyperbolic functions!

Although I agree with you, it is nevertheless also true that a member of the
Lua team maintains a math library that has not only those, but all of what C99
has to offer.

> Then table.move (good addition but why the complicated usage pattern,
> resembling the C memmove, and why "move", when it copies things around?!?
> Another wink to C programmers?).

I like it, having written something similar (except that mine can reverse,
i.e. table.move(x,i,j,x,j,i). Note that the Lua table.move returns the
destination
table, encouraging you to chain self-calls.

> What if Donald Knuth kept TeX for himself and didn't endorse the efforts of
> the community to build that enormous, reliable and widespread code-base?

He did indeed keep TeX for himself. He has been a mere participant in
that codebase. He has not endorsed anything build on top of TeX, not
even LaTeX, and seems to write a new style file, even new Metafonts,
for every project. That's very Lua-ish :-)

The difference is that TeX converges to TeX version math.pi, so that
eternal backwards compatibility is guaranteed.

<tldr> I haven't yet read Pierre's response which I now see peeping out
as the screen scrolls up, so please forgive my if I have duplicated
some of his points. </tldr>