I haven't looked into luvit for over a year now. Part of the reasons was that replacing the default "require" mechanism that works different made it hard to mix in existing other code. I stopped using it after a while for other reasons that aren't related to luvit, but there was a bit of a bad taste to using it because it worked differently from what I am used to as a Lua developer.
Personally I'm not against a runtime. I actually like "batteries included" or being able to include other libraries. I think node.js is excelling in this and it's something I really like about it. I'm currently not planning to use luvit anywhere since I don't do much with Lua these days - so just my opinion on this: - Don't break compatibility with existing Lua code. So to provide a node.js like require system, I'd expect to see something like luvit.require instead. - Having lit as a package manager for the luvit eco system would be ok for me. I'd even know then that it's targeting luvit and presumably works well with it. Cheers, Eike 2015-12-16 21:32 GMT+01:00 Tim Caswell <[email protected]>: > Currently luvit is a self-contained binary complete with luajit, zip asset > handling, openssl, miniz, and a variety of other tools baked in. It has > it's own require system that works like node.js and not like lua. The lit > package manager works off the assumptions of this require system and has > it's own package repository apart from luarocks. > > I could repeat all the reasons why we made these decisions, but as time > goes on, I'm starting to wonder if I was catering to an audience that > doesn't exist. Most JS developers could care less about Luvit because it's > not JavaScript. most Lua developers don't like it because it doesn't play > nice with existing tools and ecosystems. > > I would love to start a conversation about two things: > > 1. Are you even interested in a version of luvit that works with normal > lua binaries? > > 2. What would such a luvit look like? Would we keep lit and the custom > require system? How would we continue to support the current luvit system? > > -Tim Caswell > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "luvit" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "luvit" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
