4 ms·

Tcl was 1988. Lua was 1993. Lua is quite a bit larger than Tcl. In addition, no two Lua installations can ever agree on which modules they require (which mak

by bsder 2y ago

Tcl was 1988. Lua was 1993. Lua is quite a bit larger than Tcl. In addition, no two Lua installations can ever agree on which modules they require (which makes the actual Lua binary even bigger).

fullstop 2y ago
Larger? On my system libtcl8.6.so is 1.7 megabytes and liblua5.1.so is 192 kilobytes. It's not even close. Lua uses libraries / modules based on where you tell the interpreter they are located, so that's on you. Set package.path and package.cpath correctly.
- bsder 2y ago
  You are comparing 2024 versions. Go find the original tarball versions from 1990 (maybe you have to go to Usenet sources!). Tcl was small.
  - fullstop 2y ago
    Ah, you used "is" and not "was" in your original post. I wonder if TCL 2.1 will compile with modern gcc?
    - bsder 2y ago
      That would probably be painful. It's old-style C. Better to start with Jim Tcl or Picol. Even something like Tiny Tcl would be a better start (I think it fit in 64K).