Re: Luajit interpreter question
- From: Karel Tuma <kat@xxxxxx>
- To: luajit <luajit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 14:03:59 +0200
Excerpts from Daniel Kolesa's message of 2014-09-03 11:58:46 +0200:
> LuaFFI is far from being actually useful. When I tried it was incredibly
> buggy, only supported 2 or so architectures, didn't map to LuaJIT FFI
> semantics closely and I managed to get it to fuck up on first non-trivial
> example. So portability-wise and functionality-wise you're better off
> actually using LuaJIT if you intend to use the FFI.
Indeed it needs some dusting off. The good part is that the Lua side of
API is already implemented. As for cosmetic changes, those amount mostly to
fixing Lua interop and ABI archdep:
* Rip out all the archdep stuff, its mostly broken anyway. Dynasm
does not support archs beyond what LuaJIT does already either.
* Replace with libffi which is robust and well maintained.
* Patch Lua to make it aware of ctype compare semantics.
* Teach libffi new arch if it is missing your target (has plenty, but not all).
It's not as hard as it sounds, though there is no code in the open
(both libffi and luaffi) as there are interesting bussiness cases
for this in the embedded/mobile space (aarch64, thumb2 .. yay for MIT).
The idea here is to get good long term portability with not much effort,
something I've been unable to achieve with LuaJIT (though eventually will
need to port LJ to thumb2, as speed of current solution is rather abysmal).
Other related posts:
