Thanks for the heads-up, I replied on the lua mailing list. On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Ryan Phillips <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Alek, > > Thiago's points were the following [paraphrasing]: > > 1) Lift is better for client side > 2) Luvit uses callbacks > 3) Lit package manager > > Let me start out by mentioning that Luvit exists within a stack: Luv > (libuv bindings), Luvi (a common executable), Lit (Package Manger), and > Luvit (a module found within Lit). > > In version 2 of Luvit the goal was to split a part the dependencies where > a user could use Luv and Luvi without needing to use Luvit. Lit is written > entirely in blocking co-routine style of code getting all the benefits of > the asynchronous libuv backend. Luvit kept with backwards compatibility and > preserves the nodejs/callback style but the callbacks are entirely > optional. Tim wrote many coro-* style modules that fit nicely into the Luvi > eco-system providing the coroutine functionality [1]. > > The Luvit/luvi ecosystem is used interchangeably with client side or > server side code. I don't quite understand Thiago's distinction. > > We have a package manager for Lit and works great for projects that you > want to use luvi with. It really is a nice addition to the stack. Tim has > recently gotten luv to build with luarocks and it is now in their > repository as well. > > For me, Lift looks pretty similar to Luvi+Coroutine modules. We probably > have not advertised the co-routine style enough with the new 2.0 stack, but > it does exist and works well. Luvit's goal will continue to be callback > style; however, Luvit will not dictate the lower portions of the stack. > Luvit is basically a npm module now; pluggable within user's applications > and totally optional. > > Regards, > Ryan > > [1] https://github.com/luvit/lit/tree/master/deps > > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 7:30 AM, Alek Paunov <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi guys, >> >> Few days ago, in the Lua ML, new interesting Lua tool and module - Lift >> [1] was announced, which also happened to be libuv based. Immediately >> the question: >> >> "What is the relationship between Lift and Luvit. Can you compare >> them, please?" >> >> was asked. The author of the tool - Thiago tried to shed some light: >> >> http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2016-02/msg00131.html >> >> But as far as I correctly follow more recent directions in Luvit design >> evolution, Thiago describes earlier versions of the Luvit vision. >> >> I am forwarding this to Luvit ML, because since then no one >> stepped to clarify the actual Luvit state in this thread, and I >> unfortunately do not have enough Luvit knowledge (and English) to post a >> decent update. >> >> Kind Regards, >> Alek >> >> [1] https://github.com/tbastos/lift >> >> -- >> 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. > -- 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.
