Lua is the C of scripting language.
The whole interpreter is written in just 20000 lines of code, as opposed to over half of million of Python.
The major version has been the same for over a decade now, as opposed to Python changing every year, and the notorious Python2->Python3 breakage.
It's simple and small, a perfect sidekick for C. Why didn't you tell me about it, Sup Forums?
Everyone here knows lua. even fags know lua to mod their games.
You just found it? xd
>a fucking brazilian programming language
hues > pajeets
Not by a lot, but somehow Lua manages to be retardedly fast and lightweight. Can't argue with performance.
Made for Petroleum engineers.
My first Lua function
function bin2hex(bin)
assert(type(bin) == 'string', 'bin2hex: argument must be a string')
assert(bin:sub(1, 2) =='0b', 'bin2hex: string must start with \'0b\'')
assert(bin:sub(3, #bin):find('[^01]') == nil,
'bin2hex: string after prefix must contain 0s and 1s only')
if #bin == 2 then bin = '0b0000' end
if (#bin - 2) % 4 ~= 0 then bin = bin..('0'):rep(4 - (#bin - 2) % 4) end
local lookup_table =
{
['0000'] = '0',
['0001'] = '1',
['0010'] = '2',
['0011'] = '3',
['0100'] = '4',
['0101'] = '5',
['0110'] = '6',
['0111'] = '7',
['1000'] = '8',
['1001'] = '9',
['1010'] = 'A',
['1011'] = 'B',
['1100'] = 'C',
['1101'] = 'D',
['1110'] = 'E',
['1111'] = 'F'
}
local hex = '0x'
for i = 3, #bin, 4 do
local byte = bin:sub(i, i + 3)
hex = hex..lookup_table[byte]
end
return hex
end
Lua is a good language but it's too barebones for my taste tbqh.
Not a bad thing though, it's one of its advantages, but I don't need it.
Although I would like to study in PUC-Rio, those guys there are fucking genius.
it's awesome
Are you retarded?
hue, no it's a reasonable doubt to have but Lua somehow gets a pass.
>Why didn't you tell me about it, Sup Forums?
Because nobody here will tell you about any scripting language.
>as opposed to over half of million of Python
Those million lines of standard library code is why Python is used so much more than Lua.
>judging a programming language by the country of origin of it's creator(s) instead of the it's technical merits.
>reasonable
Those half a million lines is the reason Python is much more prone to downfall because of the complexity behind it.
The higher the degree of complexity between a programming language or a library, the more active developers and existing codebase you need to support their existance.
The super simple languages like C and Lua, combined with their slow pace of change are only going to get stronger as their programmers and codebase grow older and everybody begins to realize the importance of maturity and stability, as all the other languages and libraries drown in complexity.
C++ is being competed by C#, Java, objective-C and all the other languages, Python is being competed by Ruby, Perl and other competing languages, but they're all doing it the same - by trying to introduce the biggest shitload of "features" they can, supporting everything they can think of, missing the most important point.
Stability. Compatibility. Simplicity. Power.
Time is in C's and Lua's favor.
So instead of having half a million lines of code maintained by the FOSS community and Python foundation devs, you'd rather have those half a million lines of code maintained by you/your company? Smart choice.
>Python is being competed by Ruby
That's a nice joke, you got any more?
The code the FOSS community maintains is mostly fuss you shouldn't rely on. Hundreds of functions to do the same thing in thousands of different ways.
I personally find it stupid to rely on something you have no idea how it works and couldn't reproduce (in reasonable time frame) if something went wrong and the developers maintaining it decided to focus their attention on something more exciting. You're depending on thousands of lines of code that someone else wrote over course of many years.
I'm not saying don't use open-source software, I'm just saying use only the BEST open-source software, stuff that is small, simple and has a big user-base and well-established standards, so that you wouldn't rely on it so recklessly.
I'm talking about either granite-like libraries and languages like libsndfile, GLFW, libPNG, libJPEG, OpenGL, Linux libraries and C, or small, easily reproducible yet still large community having libraries and languages.
Using FOSS is like putting a chain with weighs on the other end on your neck. You have to make sure that either you can withstand the shock if someone stops supporting it for you, or you have an nearly indestructible faith in their supporters.
You use OpenGL or OpenCL? You are supported by Intel, Nvidia and AMD.
You use SDL? You are supported by Valve.
You use Lua? It's a fixed logic thing, you have the most portable C code in the world, don't worry, nothing's gonna happen, even if there's no huge company around it.
You use C? It's never going down.
I'm not so sure about Python. I'm not sure a language of that size, without any de jure standard will be sure to support itself over the years. Yes, it has a huge user base, but how much of that code is actually left there to be supported? So much of that code is throw-away scripts, ports of C libraries, small apps. One of the biggest stuff written in Python is Python itself!!
SDL's been strong before valve and I don't know exactly how much their support is going to matter considering how bad they are at supporting.
>I'm not saying don't use open-source software, I'm just saying use only the BEST open-source software, stuff that is small, simple and has a big user-base and well-established standards, so that you wouldn't rely on it so recklessly.
What OS do you run?
although this is wholly true, the question you have to ask, if you are not a developer yourself, what software are you going to use if not FOSS? Propietary stuff is not immune from the "i wanna do something else syndrom,'
That's not Tcl
I like Tk/Inter but tcl is meh.
All of this is true with proprietary software with the added bonus that if a chain link part of software gets dropped it is NOT EVEN POSSIBLE for someone else to pick it up.
Lubuntu.
I'll check it out.
Exactly. I'm just saying that in general you should try to make your applications use only as much complexity as they need. And try to make everything (libraries and languages) modular, small and sturdy, fulfilling one specific purpose, like functions.
>the BEST open-source software, stuff that is small, simple and has a big user-base and well-established standards
>ubuntu anything
wew lad. install obsd.
There's some big stuff around too, a lot of times it's what leaks out to the community from friendly-ish companies. Blender's my best example of a fucking huge suite of freedoms.
>C and Lua will win
>t. cs undergrad
Huehuehue
That's why golang has huge adoption, right?
The simple truth is that people are sick of reinventing the wheel and want a reasonable stdlib. Productivity is vastly superior to simplicity
>No standard
What are PEPs?
LISP will win, just you wait. slow and steady.
>the FOSS community and Python foundation devs
i.e incompetent SJWs that are ready to blow the moment there is some sort of online controversy.
Yeah I'd rather rely on professionals instead.
If CL would have chosen to be like Scheme, LISP wouldn't be a joke. But it chose to be C++, and look what happened.
>This was the appearance and structure of the tables: They sparkled like types, and all looked like lambdas. Each appeared to be made like a table intersecting a table.
productivity is dependent on simplicity
>Yeah I'd rather rely on professionals instead.
If you were actually employed you would know that large FOSS projects like Python or Linux are almost entirely developed by professional software engineers being paid by large companies like Google or Amazon. Fuck, Guido himself spent seven years getting paid by Google to work on Python.
Spoken like someone who's never developed a thing
Do I want to rewrite a sorting algorithm again? No. pthreads instead of goroutines? No. Mutexes instead of ownership? No.
Boilerplate is bad. I'm not advocating abstractfactoryfactories. I'm saying a stdlib is good. And one which is intuitive. Not glib.
this isnt the type of function you should be writing in your scripting language
Why? It's string manipulation. String manipulation is scripting language territory, unless you're making a dedicated word processor.
So there should be a function for it.
>look what happened
Big projects get written in CL by a small team of skilled devs, then the projects get ported to mainstream languages like Python, Java or C++ so as to be more maintainable by mainstream devs?
That doesn't seem very analogous to C++.
>code maintained by the FOSS community and Python foundation
I have bad news.
>golang has huge adoption
???
>what are containers and container orchestration
Eh, kubernetes isn't that widely adopted.
>huge
Goyim I...
>what is docker
>average Sup Forums poster's knowledge of industry trends
>docker on life support
It's just kubernetes again.
>he's doubling down
and that has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue