5 ms·
I don't understand how that could be... Could you explain? If a portion of your app is written in Lua, how can you claim that the app is "originally written" i
by jcl 17y ago
I don't understand how that could be... Could you explain? If a portion of your app is written in Lua, how can you claim that the app is "originally written" in a C derivative?
- dazzawazza 17y agoIt's a technicality of course but you can rightly claim that the app is written in C and that it interprets the Lua code. In the same way it may interpret and XML file. Of course we all know this is a technicality and it doesn't matter since 3.3.2 states "... No interpreted code may be downloaded or used in an Application...". The two clauses combine to put Lua on a sticky wicket. Certainly for video games it's not as if there is a slim C layer and the vast bulk is written in Lua. Most game engines are huge and only game flow and AI are written in Lua.
- barrkel 17y agoNo you can't rightly claim that. The C is an intermediary translation layer.
- dazzawazza 17y agoCorrect. So you carefully craft it so that it doesn't "...link to Documented APIs... " i.e. it only interfaces with your application. It's all tenuous I agree.
- blasdel 17y agoIn the previous version of the Agreement, 3.3.2 stated "... No interpreted code may be downloaded AND used in an Application..." Using an embedded interpreter that only ran the signed code inside your app bundle was previously quasi-legit -- it was more narrowly restricting the use of an interpreter to bypass the App Store review process.
- ZeroGravitas 17y agoThey changed that AND to an OR a while ago, before this recent announcement. So basically that reduces down to: no interpreters. So these games using Lua were already breaking Apple's rules.