Moonjit – Fork of LuaJIT to Continue Development

Re:Moonjit – Fork of LuaJIT to Continue Development by urukhaislayer69 on Saturday December 21, 2019 @08:28AM (#21851115)

IIRC there's a comment from Mike Pall (maybe it was here, can't bother to search it for now) where he stated very clearly that there was always enough money on the luajit table. So no financial reasons, he just wanted to do something else (and he didn't like the new lua features so much, pain to implement and all that stuff, so maybe that's the real reason...).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Moonjit – Fork of LuaJIT to Continue Development by anonymoushn on Saturday December 21, 2019 @08:39AM (#21851144)

Features in PUC-Rio Lua after Lua 5.2 or so are mostly all terrible, with the possible exception of <toclose> (a bad version of golang's defer). So I respect the choice not to add those features. There was still lots of work to do to improve the GC and such though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Moonjit – Fork of LuaJIT to Continue Development by doomrobo on Saturday December 21, 2019 @10:38AM (#21851648)

What about integers and bitops in 5.3? That seems like a big deal

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Moonjit – Fork of LuaJIT to Continue Development by s_y_n_t_a_x on Saturday December 21, 2019 @11:52AM (#21852081)

Bitops are in LuaJit

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Moonjit – Fork of LuaJIT to Continue Development by lifthrasiir on Saturday December 21, 2019 @03:45PM (#21853271)

Lua 5.3 integers are 64 bits long by default, and that makes a real difference.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Moonjit – Fork of LuaJIT to Continue Development by DarkWiiPlayer on Sunday December 22, 2019 @02:44AM (#21855829)

That's trivial to implement as a C function though, so no real need to add it as a language feature

[ Parent | on HN ]