3 ms·
Interesting. I tried Lua about 6 years ago and found myself unable to see an upside to the language in comparative perspective with python and tcl. This is
by needlepont 8y ago
Interesting.
I tried Lua about 6 years ago and found myself
unable to see an upside to the language in
comparative perspective with python and tcl.
This is for full featured *nix systems programming
in the HPC world so ymmv.
- AceJohnny2 8y agoLua's niche is absolutely as an embedded extension language for C/C++ programs. It's core benefits is how tiny and yet expressive it is (and it looks like C if you squint.) I've seen it show up in a variety of projects in that role, for games or embedded testing environments. I indeed don't see it having any benefit over Python or TCL in more sophisticated environments.
- abenedic 8y agoThe programming model for c ffi that lua uses is, I think, a little nicer.
- srean 8y agoI have a soft corner for Tcl. Tcl was a pioneer. Lua is smaller, faster and more tightly and coherently designed. Lua had coroutines right from the start. With Lua you have the option of using LuaJIT. I enjoy both, but I would be more wary of using Tcl in critical systems. But when its play time, i happily break out tclsh.
- needlepont 8y agoI've used TCL in production for 15 years. The only thing to really worry about is a consistent policy on language usage. Keeping to the base features of the language and extensions in tcllib/tclx is a pretty solid recipe. That said here are things I advise. * No upvar/uplevel. Use a namespace. * Use apply wisely. * No ad-hoc (say swig inline wrappers) extensions without deep review. * If you are writing a front end in tk - think twice. * If you are doing OOP with TCL choose wisely.