Re: [textadept] Potential 5.0 Roadmap

From: mitchell <c....at.caladbolg.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:43:48 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)

Steve and Robert,

On Sun, 18 Dec 2011, Robert wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 10:34 AM, steve donovan
> <steve.j.dono....at.gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 11:54 PM, mitchell <c....at.caladbolg.net> wrote:
>>> Preface: I am not committed to any of the below. These are just my ideas
>>> that I wanted to share with the community.
>>
>> I think the key word about module() and 5.2 is that it's 'deprecated'.
>> �That is, it will still be there until 5.3. �Personally I don't use it
>> any more (with 5.1 as well) but there's no reason to change something
>> that (a) works and (b) the documentation tools know well.
>>
>
> I thought the same thing, I have no problem with updating the modules
> I maintain and I think the way modules are handled in 5.2 is much
> clearer than before. Still, if it's not much effort to maintain
> backward compatibility I would keep support for "module" in TA. There
> is also some code out there that is not on the Wiki or mentioned on
> the mailing list, for example a Scintillua lexer for the experimental
> MoonScript language [1][2].

The primary issue I have with supporting backwards-compatible 'module' is
the confusion that can occur, e.g. "why does `require 'foo'` for the foo
module create `_m.foo` while I need `_m.bar = require 'bar'` for bar?". I
prefer consistency.

>> The obvious question is: why upgrade Lua, especially when it's
>> embedded in an application?

Because ta is cutting edge :) Lua 5.1 is over 5 years old anyway.

> If there are speed improvements through using LuaJIT, I think using
> LuaJIT by default with as much as possible 5.2 compatibility enabled
> might be worth considering. I still like the idea of having access to
> the foreign function interface [3] of LuaJIT, as I wrote before [4].
> Is it possible to build TA on Windows with LuaJIT at the moment? I'd
> like to try if this actually works as I hope.

I may include both executables in binary packages: textadept and
textadeptjit for Linux and Mac OSX, textadept.exe and textadeptjit.exe on
Win32.

> Generally, I really like TA going forward fast and I have a few ideas
> with possibly API-breaking changes, that I'll post shortly.

I'd be very interested to hear these.

mitchell
Received on Mon 19 Dec 2011 - 08:43:48 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu 08 Mar 2012 - 12:26:26 EST