1. Re: Gui we really need...
Hello CK,
----------
> Îò: C. K. Lester <cklester at yahoo.com>
> Òåìà: RE: Gui we really need...
> Äàòà: 14 íîÿáðÿ 2002 ã. 7:35
>
> > I never got Lua running either, but it sounds
> > like a grand idea of a
> > programming language!
>
> Oh, the irony! A language that nobody can make
> run (okay, kat and irv, but
> they're pretty big names in EUPHORIAdom)
> is "a grand idea?"
>
> EUPHORIA runs, so it must be grander still, seeing
> as how even dummies like
> me can actually make it work!
I got yesterday Lua 4.0 for DJGPP running on my machine.
It is very small, primitive and can not be even compared against Euphoria
because of they are the languages of
different classes.
Euphoria is, so to say, the Battle-Cruiser and Lua is
something like to Auxiliary Vessel on my sea-dog's look.
But Euphoria interpreters are as small as
Lua interpreter is...
But Euphoria binder is much smaller than Lua compiler
which is not the real compiler but just maker of binary
form code for the Lua interpreter...
But Euphoria To C translators are as small as Lua
compiler, which is not a compiler...
And Lua language is much less readable than EU language.
And Lua concept is very artificial with its absence
of types but with its strange tags, nils, tables,
adjustments for the number of arguments and returned
values for the functions.
All varyables are global, locals in functions require
the key word 'local' ... And so on ... etc .. and so on.
Lua can not compete with Euphoria,
Lua is a satellite-language just to make life
little easier with C/C++/C#.
Good luck with running Lua under Euphoria control,
brave Euphorians!
Regards,
Igor Kachan
kinz at peterlink.ru
