On May 30, 2018, at 4:45 PM, Russell Haley <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
On a previous project I had a similar issue.
The application developers fiercely resisted our choice of using Lua. As best I could figure out, this was all “I don’t want to learn a language that won’t help me get my next job”.
You might run in to this form of resistance.
We had two real counter arguments
1) licensing meant that Python, Java, (the app developers favorites) etc we’re not options and
2) PiL has “all you need to know about Lua” and it’s like 1/4 the size of the equivalent Python, etc, books from O’Reilly. In other words, “Lua is easy”.
Our app developers became reasonably proficient in Lua in about a week, learning the library & environment my team was developing took another week or so
With the addition that these advanced things are not mandatory for core proficiency in writing basic applications
I would also add that app developers might be assuming that the compiler does a lot of optimization, etc. PUC-Rio Lua does not do any optimization.
This was an issue in my old project. The app team said that the Lua version of their code ran 50-500x slower than C.
I spent about 2 days getting that to 5-10x slower. I just did some basic optimizations that we all learned when we started programming (back in the dark ages).
(The app developers really didn’t like me or Lua after that ... but that’s another, nontechnical, story :-)
Yes - ish
If Lua will be running on some standard cpu with an OS of some sort, etc, and you’d have things that look like function calls that actually send data into the FPGA to do its magic.
The project I was on did sort of the same thing. It worked well ... but you need to put time into figuring out the programming model for the lua apps and the interfaces that the model requires. In addition you need to put a lot of time into designing the api between the Lua apps and the special functions embedded in the FPGA.