Re: Lua as a scripting language in NetBSD

[Adam Hoka <adam.hoka%gmail.com@localhost>]

On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 1:40 PM, Marc Balmer <marc%msys.ch@localhost> wrote:
>
> Am 17.10.2009 um 13:18 schrieb Martin Husemann:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 12:56:08PM +0200, Havard Eidnes wrote:
>>>
>>> Now, what perspective did *that* statement come from?!?
>>
>> Marc said he won't discuss Java nor JavaScript - I just had to bite.
>> JavaScript is realy a cool language, despite the misguiding name. And I
>> have the gut feeling that more people are used to writing/reading
>> JavaScript
>> than Lua.
>
> I must probably clarify this. ÂI did look at JavaScript and Java but I
> embedded both in host programs to check their fitness for the task at hand.
> ÂThey are not good candidates according to my judgment, huge, massive, big
> memory fingerprint. ÂI really don't see those languages as good canidates
> for general use. ÂPython, Perl, Lua, otoh, could be seen as natural
> candidates. ymmv.
>
> That is why I only talked about the other languages in my mail. ÂActually, I
> did want to talk about any other language, as I think the features of Lua
> should stand for theirselves and everyone can look at Lua, any other
> language and draw his own conclusions.
>
> I was looking at:
>
> - memory footprint
> - execution speed
> - setup/startup speed (loading a binary with the language interpreter linked
> in)
> - language (syntax, features)
> - ease of use (aka ease of learning)
> - embeddability
> - stability
> - reference use

You forgot the most important: the ability to cross compile the
interpreter, which rules out perl( and I think python too).