[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Module to work with .ini files
- From: Alexander Gladysh <agladysh@...>
- Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2010 21:38:08 +0400
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 15:36, steve donovan <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 1:26 PM, Alexander Gladysh <email@example.com> wrote:
>> However, I already have my own all-purpose Lua library in the
>> dependencies. Adding another one seems to be an overkill :-)
> The story of our lives ;) You're free to adapt config.lua for your
> purposes, it only depends on utils.lua for a few things.
I went the other way and just released inih bindings (see announce post). :-)
>> Perhaps Penlight can be split to many rockspecs, one per module? (Not
>> that I really need this, just an idea.)
> I've thought about that. All those times we just want a good robust
> function to split a string into a list - bringing in a 8,000 line set
> of libraries does feel like overkill. That was the thinking behind
> LuaSnippets - have a standard place to keep short & useful functions
> and make it easy to search for them.
We (Lua community) need LuaSnippets — as a learning tool, I'm all for it.
But LuaSnippets will not help production-quality code reuse. Only
LuaRocks (or a similar system) can do that.
All-purpose libraries (or module collections) have right to live —
they are the next layer after Lua core API.
But I think that such libraries, whenever possible, should be split up
to several independent rocks, so user would be able to install only
the required components (plus, of course, some inevitable core
Sadly it is hard to do (at the moment for my own lua-nucleo, but for
your Penlight looks fit for the task. So, why not?