I've been silent in this thread mostly because I'm not very active as a developer these days, but it got me wondering why one would use lua instead of nasal.
Searching for 'lua nasal' in google the first hit describes it all to my opinion: http://trainofthoughts.org/blog/2007/09/16/lua-popularity/ > If low footprint, then really low footprint, please… > > Or to stretch the point even further: if low footprint is really the ultimate > reason for Lua (which is 13K LoC) and a reason against JavaScript (80K LoC) > or even Perl (105K LoC), then I still do not understand why people not even > use for instance Arena (14K LoC) or even NASAL (5K LoC). Arena and NASAL both > at least are a lot more C/ C++ /Perl/ Java/ JavaScript style in their look > and feel and so at least attract the “old-style” coders a lot more. I agree with this statement and therefore don't particularly like the idea to change scripting language just for the sake of it. I do wonder how well lua would handle the property system (and xml files) though. Erik ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
