4 ms·
>easy to code for (syntactical quirks aside, I'm talking from a "cognitive load" standpoint) That's not a fair comparison. A large chunk of the cognitive load
by anilakar 8y ago
>easy to code for (syntactical quirks aside, I'm talking from a "cognitive load" standpoint)
That's not a fair comparison. A large chunk of the cognitive load comes from the awkward syntax and other design decisions that stem from it.
>Lua is the type of language you embed in your C app to make it configurable.
Situations where configuration files aren't sophisticated enough but a Python interpreter is too heavy are few and far between.
- simias 8y agoSyntax is very subjective and a matter of taste and familiarity. I don't really like Lua's syntax but from a cognitive load standpoint it's still your average dynamically typed, garbage collected scripting language. Syntax notwithstanding it's easier to code for than C's unmanaged and unchecked runtime or Rust's complex type system and borrow checker. >Situations where configuration files aren't sophisticated enough but a Python interpreter is too heavy are few and far between. That's not the point I was making and I'm not trying to get into a language war between Lua and Python, I have no horse in that race.