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

From: Simon Lundmark <simon.att.pixeldiet.se>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 07:27:00 +0100

If it would help with supporting luaJit for textadept I'd gladely help out
with backporting missing functionality. Since LuaJIT already supports the
bitwise functions then I guess the utf8-part would be the only one we need
to port?

Cheers,
Simon

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 7:54 PM, Robert Gieseke <rob.g.att.web.de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> so, with 5.3 out, any decisions or plans for switching the nightly?
>
> Cheers,
> Robert
>
> Am 16/12/14 um 22:30 schrieb Mitchell:
> > 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 code.att.foicica.com.
> To change subscription settings, send an e-mail to code+help.att.foicica.com.
> To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to code+unsubscribe.att.foicica.com.
>
>

-- 
*Simon Lundmark*
*CEO*
*Pixeldiet Entertainment AB*
+46(0)761620695
simon.att.pixeldiet.se
-- 
You are subscribed to code.att.foicica.com.
To change subscription settings, send an e-mail to code+help.att.foicica.com.
To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to code+unsubscribe.att.foicica.com.
Received on Tue 13 Jan 2015 - 01:27:00 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue 13 Jan 2015 - 06:54:24 EST