RE: Turning Lua into C++ (was: alleviate the load of the GC)

  • From: William Adams <william_a_adams@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "luajit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <luajit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 15:38:13 +0000

From: cosmin.apreutesei@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2015 18:30:32 +0300
Subject: Re: Turning Lua into C++ (was: alleviate the load of the GC)
To: luajit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

It looks like there's already a contest going on about the best way
to hijack and destroy LuaJIT with the most atrocious and hazardous

I guess it depends on how this community reacts to the suggestion of these
changes. I don't see anything wrong with people expressing their desire to
make wacky changes. In fact, I think it's actually required because it helps
shape the "consensus opinion".
I know there's been an allergic reaction to many of the changes suggested by
the tarantool camp in the past for example. It's when the rest of the
community doesn't know the technical implications of a seemingly "decent
proposal" that things will go really sideways.
That must be disheartening to see.

I'm outta here in a couple of days.

For good?

It doesn't appear there will be a 'new maintainer' in a couple of days, so our
real problem will be stagnation, rather than rampant disembowelment.
I see rays of hope. "luajit should always be about performance". I agree to
that, and it should be a cornerstone in the 'luajit manifesto'. I also believe
another key differentiator is the ffi, and that should always grow and improve.
And another tenet is "the runtime size should remain small and embeddable".

Other related posts: