Re: [code] [textadept] Future of LuaJIT Version

From: Richard Philips <>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 15:01:03 +0100

Hi Mitchell,

I *used* the LuaJIT version to implement spellchecking with hunspell: the
FFI features were really wonderful.

But ...

With the advent of the *spawn()* features, I succeeded in replacing the FFI
with bi-directional piping against the hunspell executable.

So, for me it is not longer necessary to support LuaJIT. Speed was never a


On Tuesday, December 16, 2014, Mitchell <> wrote:

> Hi,
> With Lua 5.3 on the horizon (it's at the release candidate stage now), I'd
> like to take the time to consider the future of Textadept's LuaJIT version
> and get some feedback and opinions.
> LuaJIT is based on Lua 5.1 (which is now almost 9 years old!) and appears
> to have no plans to support Lua 5.3's new features (at least not in the
> near future), particularly bitwise operators and the UTF-8 library.
> Textadept would utilize both of these new features right away and thus
> would be incompatible with LuaJIT.
> Now, Textadept has always had some sort of Lua 5.2 compatibility layer for
> LuaJIT, but I don't think this is viable anymore for 5.3, especially when
> it comes to bitwise operators. Besides, I prefer not to reimplement code
> (like a utf8 library) that already exists :)
> So this brings us to the question "what does LuaJIT offer"? Speed of
> course, but in a text editor for programmers, I believe the speed
> difference is quite negligible. (This is addressed in the FAQ and text
> editors aren't exactly "power apps" either...) LuaJIT does have an FFI
> library, but in the 7+ years of Textadept's existence, I haven't seen one
> FFI extension posted to the wiki or mailing list. (In my opinion, the most
> likely candidate is an extension to use Windows' native file chooser -- I
> cannot imagine any other useful FFI extensions.)
> As it is, maintaining LuaJIT compatibility is a bit of a chore
> (particularly when a new release comes out) and would be more so with the
> release of Lua 5.3. I'd rather not stick with 5.2 either.
> That being said, I'm leaning towards dropping LuaJIT functionality and
> going with Vanilla Lua 5.3 once it's released. However, I'd encourage any
> feedback, for or against, such a move. (We have some time until the
> official release.) In particular, I'm curious to know who actually uses the
> LuaJIT version, why, and are there good reasons to keep it around?
> All other feedback is welcome and appreciated.
> Cheers,
> Mitchell
> --
> You are subscribed to
> To change subscription settings, send an e-mail to
> To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to

You are subscribed to
To change subscription settings, send an e-mail to
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to
Received on Thu 18 Dec 2014 - 09:01:03 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri 19 Dec 2014 - 06:44:21 EST