3 ms·
Surprised nobody has mentioned LuaJIT. The engineering is very impressive; Mike Pall may know more about writing just in time compilers than any one person. It
by fdr 4y ago
Surprised nobody has mentioned LuaJIT. The engineering is very impressive; Mike Pall may know more about writing just in time compilers than any one person.
It seemed to have more prominence many moons ago when it supported the latest Lua language definitions, and it is still actively maintained, but the author I suppose decided that Lua would routinely do things that made it a moving target, and version 5.1 would suffice.
- scythe 4y agoMike Pall complained that the introduction of the _ENV scope layer would make LuaJIT slower and therefore less interesting, so he let it diverge. But also, since LuaJIT is heavier and less portable, it kind of makes sense that it should have a more stable syntax, since that tilts the use cases towards more standalone projects.
- JonChesterfield 4y agoLua 5.2 + luajit with the 5.2 compat flag seems fine to me, don't feel like I'm missing anything post-divergence
- wruza 4y agoDoes it? I remember JIT issues imposed by Apple Store restrictions, but otherwise it’s just a small so/dll/dylib which is around hundreds of kilobytes in size, iirc. It can’t run on 8-16 bit cpus, but realistically would you run vanilla Lua there? ESP8266/NodeMCU comes to mind, not sure if one could target LuaJIT without JIT compiled in to it.