Re: [PD] pdlua also into vanilla?

Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: On Jul 19, 2008, at 10:40 AM, marius schebella wrote: Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: As a test yes, but not for the release. It's changing too fast right now to maintain backwards compatibility, so including it would cause more problems than it would solve.

Re: [PD] pdlua also into vanilla?

On Jul 20, 2008, at 3:14 AM, Ico Doornekamp wrote: * On 2008-07-20 Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : Le 19 juil. 08 à 16:40, marius schebella a écrit : Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: As a test yes, but not for the release. It's changing too fast right now to maintain backwards

Re: [PD] pdlua also into vanilla?

On Jul 19, 2008, at 10:40 AM, marius schebella wrote: Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: As a test yes, but not for the release. It's changing too fast right now to maintain backwards compatibility, so including it would cause more problems than it would solve. I am not sure, if it really

Re: [PD] pdlua also into vanilla?

Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: As a test yes, but not for the release. It's changing too fast right now to maintain backwards compatibility, Adding features is also changing. are you serious about this? fgamsdr IOhannes

Re: [PD] pdlua also into vanilla?

Hallo, Ico Doornekamp hat gesagt: // Ico Doornekamp wrote: I think in this case Lua really has some advantages over PHP. It is designed to be used as en embedded scripting and configuration language. The source is extremely portable (99% ANSI C) and compact (compiler + runtime typically

Re: [PD] pdlua also into vanilla?

* On 2008-07-20 Jack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote : Le 19 juil. 08 à 16:40, marius schebella a écrit : Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: As a test yes, but not for the release. It's changing too fast right now to maintain backwards compatibility, so including it would cause more

Re: [PD] pdlua also into vanilla?

Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: As a test yes, but not for the release. It's changing too fast right now to maintain backwards compatibility, so including it would cause more problems than it would solve. I am not sure, if it really changes, or if it only adds new features. I think the big

Re: [PD] pdlua also into vanilla?

Le 19 juil. 08 à 16:40, marius schebella a écrit : Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: As a test yes, but not for the release. It's changing too fast right now to maintain backwards compatibility, so including it would cause more problems than it would solve. I am not sure, if it really

[PD] pdlua also into vanilla?

hi, frank suggested this already, http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2008-03/060081.html I'd like to support the idea of shipping pdlua as closely as possible with vanilla (frank suggested a status like [expr]). right now pdlua is not even in pdx, which I hope can still be added?

Re: [PD] pdlua also into vanilla?

also into vanilla? To: pd-list@iem.at pd-list@iem.at Date: Friday, July 18, 2008, 9:41 AM hi, frank suggested this already, http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2008-03/060081.html I'd like to support the idea of shipping pdlua as closely as possible with vanilla (frank suggested

Re: [PD] pdlua also into vanilla?

PROTECTED] Subject: [PD] pdlua also into vanilla? To: pd-list@iem.at pd-list@iem.at Date: Friday, July 18, 2008, 9:41 AM hi, frank suggested this already, http://lists.puredata.info/pipermail/pd-list/2008-03/060081.html I'd like to support the idea of shipping pdlua as closely as possible

Re: [PD] pdlua also into vanilla?

Am 18.07.2008 um 17:43 schrieb Hans-Christoph Steiner: I just had a thought: how about replacing Tcl/Tk with Lua/Tk? Just a thought... i'm all for it, even though it sounds quite utopic. gr~~~ smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature