[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: TechRepublic article about languages to avoid in 2018
- From: "Soni \"They/Them\" L." <fakedme@...>
- Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 18:13:44 -0300
On 2018-03-08 05:14 PM, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
On 7 March 2018 at 21:35, Roberto Ierusalimschy <email@example.com> wrote:
hey, the FFI is the nicest thing of LuaJIT! in fact, it happens to me
a lot that i start a project in a somewhat modern Lua, and then
appears something that would some C... at that point I have to
consider: is this a "serious thing, where i do care about the users?"
then I use the Lua C API. if it's a quick and dirty thing, then i
switch to LuaJIT and use the FFI. (no, i don't consider luaffi)
luaffi is not a serious option, and cannot be; the whole philosophy of
FFI demands a compiler. FFI is what made LuaJIT definitively a fork of
Did you mean that luaffi is not a serious option for inclusion in Lua
(because it is not ANSI C etc.)?
LuaJIT's ffi is a library and I am not sure why the inclusion of a
library should cause LuaJIT to be classed as a 'fork' - although
'fork' is problematic word in my view anyway.
luaffi is a valid attempt to provide the same library for Lua.
You can implement bitops in pure Lua.
I challenge you to implement FFI in pure Lua.
Disclaimer: these emails may be made public at any given time, with or without reason. If you don't agree with this, DO NOT REPLY.