Re: FreiSein (parascriptum/parashell reincarnation)

komrades,

> Justin proposed to us LUA.. to be honest, I wasn't impressed with one
> the first time I saw it and I'm not impressed now. probably LUA's a
> good thing but we're gonna make much more lightweight, fast and
> extensible product.

Well, trying to find an argument why Lua should not be an option I've 
discovered what I was afraid of.  It is portable and runs on all known 
modern platforms.  It compiles the source to a byte code before 
executing it.  It is very small: the maximum size of the binary is 
around 41k (roughly the same on all platforms).  It is modular by 
design: you can disable modules responsible for source code translation, 
making the library even smaller (around 25k) and the execution will be 
even faster.  This is all explained in Technical Note 2 [1].

It allows writing custom extensions in form of operators, commands and 
variable types.  The more I read, the more I like it.  I'm not exactly 
sure why would we reinvent this wheel, anymore.  Neither am I sure that 
we can do it this good in an acceptable time slice.

So what exactly do you dislike in Lua and where exactly does it 
dissatisfy you?

1. http://www.lua.org/notes/ltn002.html

out.



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: YOU BE THE JUDGE. Be one of 170
Project Admins to receive an Apple iPod Mini FREE for your judgement on
who ports your project to Linux PPC the best. Sponsored by IBM.
Deadline: Sept. 24. Go here: http://sf.net/ppc_contest.php
-------------------------------------------------------
Discussions in this list are held in two languages: English and Russian.
When replying, please use the language that the sender of the original
message is guaranteed to understand, or use English.