3 ms·
In my experience the difference between 5.2 and 5.3 was more towards "negligible" than you're making out. While the functional difference may have been major, m
by fao_ 9y ago
In my experience the difference between 5.2 and 5.3 was more towards "negligible" than you're making out. While the functional difference may have been major, most programs in my experience operate exactly as you would expect them. For the majority of programs I doubt that they were even felt, aside from a few minor changes like "unpack" -> "table.unpack"
- TheCycoONE 9y agoThe biggest issue I hit when adding Lua 5.3 support to CorsiTH was that floating point numbers now crash when sent to a C function that expects a lua_Integer whereas before they would be silently truncated. Since we still support 5.1 as well I ended up scattering a lot of math.floor to compensate. That said it was trivial compared to the _ENV change for 5.2
- wahern 9y agoThat's been my experience, too. And the consensus on the lua-l list seems to be that the migration to mixed number types went relatively smoothly for most people despite the anxiety. But people were still anxious, even gung-ho Lua users. Whether or not justified, people and companies contemplating large projects are especially averse to that sort of environment. My open-source project experiences notwithstanding, before I left my day job a few months ago we still hadn't migrated our 10+ year-old project to 5.2, let alone 5.3, even though LuaJIT wasn't involved, and even though lua_callk and lua_pcallk would have significantly simplified the libevent async I/O integration. In a corporate environment planned obsolescence is a hard to sell, even when it's objectively the better choice.