[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: RE: Python and Lua
- From: "Ashley Fryer" <lua@...>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 04:29:20 -0700
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]On
> Behalf Of Nick Trout
> Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2000 3:40 AM
> You have more choice with Lua, that is its strength.
> Python's is that the
> functionality is there and users concentrate on modules and
> extension libraries
> hence further increasing its "usefulness".
I admit this is an area where I'm jealous of Python! It has a very nice
collection of libraries for image manipulation, ftp, www, tkinter, etc. I
think many people decide to use Python because of the libraries.
So, why do those libraries exist for Python but not for Lua?
* Python supports "import" semantics, thus encouraging libraries.
* From its early history, libraries were published for Python. The early
contributions encouraged later contributions.
* Marketing... Lua is marketed mainly as an extension language, Python
mainly as a standalone scripting language, so Python naturally attracts more
* User base. Python has more users ( I think ), therefore it has more
* Libraries are platform dependent, thus harder to propogate. This explains
why Lua _doesn't_ have more librares, but Python has this problem too. How
come Python overcame it but Lua didn't?
It would be nice to overcome this obstacle to broader acceptance of Lua.