You DO use Lua, right user?

You DO use Lua, right user?

Attached: 1200px-Lua-logo-nolabel.svg.png (1200x1200, 72K)

Other urls found in this thread:

benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/faster/lua.html
luajit.org/performance_x86.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closure_(computer_programming)
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

I do actually, but only to write Kong plugins.

Attached: kong.png (325x325, 8K)

Love2d is great for making gaymes.

I do, it's fast in performance but its syntax is ugly as fuck.

homework games you mean

yes as far as making a few things for rainmeter goes

Shill me Lua.

Well built, very flexible, small, embeddable, high performance language. It's what js should've been.

Try Moonscript. It's a language with sexy syntax that compiles to Lua.

Wrong reply. Meant for

I wish they made the shallow/deep table copy just a part of the language so you didn't have to copy and paste it into your code

Moonscript is heavily inspired by coffee script. IMHO an absolutely horrible syntax. Plain Lua + OOP lib is better.

but LUA infected buy lisp_tards

I've heard about it, except I think I'd like to try Squirrel instead because Moonscript is more of a transpiler like it is for CoffeeScript which is used to transpile into JavaScript.

>high performance language
fucking hell, imagine believing this shit

What are you talking about? I haven't seen anything to suggest that.

Explain. It's one of the fastest dynamic languages available.

Yes, but only for programming my Roblox game.

To add it's used in cloudflare's critical infrastructure because of it's dependability and speed. For some reason I think your full of shit. Then there's the benchmarks of course.

>one of the fastest dynamic languages
What a surprise, goalpost shifting. Lua is not fast except compared to other slow languages. Just look at this: benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/faster/lua.html

2. You will immediately cease and not continue to access the site if you are under the age of 18.

Imagine thinking that was a serious reply

Those tests aren't using LuaJIT. JIT is significantly faster than the regular Lua VM.

Probably because he has never used an interpreted language.

If you're choosing between lua and java to solve the same problem you're probably a moron.

Try Tcl. It takes some time to get used to its syntax but it's the fastest scripting language I found to write and produce working code in.
The performance is nothing to write home about but why are you using a scripting language if you care about performance?
It's also incredibly easy to embed in your applications.

Irrelevant. The claim was that Lua is fast. It's not.

Okay cool. Instead of a very slow language you now have a slow language.

See? What a fucking idiot you are.
Java isn't a scripting language.

Are you retarded? What makes you think Lua is slow?

>Instead of a very slow language you now have a slow language.
dis goal post shifting

>Goalpost shifting
What, do you think I was pretending it isn't dynamic? Just because YOU placed a goalpost and it wasn't correct doesn't mean I moved it. If anything you moved it.

Also your not showing luajit. Luajit is so much faster that when jit is disabled it is several times faster. Luajit is literally state of the art jit tech and is used by cloudflare.

Prove it's slow. That link is not fair since it's not the best. You are clearly a complete brainlet.

anyone who uses the word transpiler doesn't know what the word compiler actually means

BTFO'd

Not at all. Very slow is not fast. Slow is not fast. No goalposts have been moved.

The fact that it gets trounced by Java of all things in benchmarks.

The original claim said nothing about it being high performance for a scripting language. Just that it is high performance, which I have disproved.

The original post didn't say "high performance for a dynamic language". It said "high performance language".

I don't doubt that LuaJIT runs faster than plain Lua. It's still not fast, though.

>Prove it's slow. That link is not fair since it's not the best
>prove X. no, that proof doesn't count

Its syntax looks more unfamiliar to me than Ruby I've tried.
>why are you using a scripting language if you care about performance?
Applications, games and frameworks, what can I do about it?

Imagine going through this many mental gymnastics

Lua? As in...gmod?

whattabout robbux?

You don't need to, you already are in your desperation to pretend Lua isn't slow (regardless of whether LuaJIT is used).

>This car is shit so all cars are shit
That's you. You look at the worst implementation to judge the whole thing. If that's allowed give me a some time and I'll make a c compiler that is so inefficient that Ruby is faster and suddenly Lua is faster than c by your logic.

Attached: earlycar.jpg (355x142, 8K)

LuaJIT is fast.

>Please use Java, guys. It's better than Python, Lua and JavaScript. I promise.
>Why do people still hate Java? I just don't get it.

Don't bother, user.
is a poojeet Java shill.

I don't even like Java. You're reading things into my post which aren't there.

I acknowledge that it's less slow than standard Lua.

It appears you're having difficulty understanding what I wrote. I'll try to simplify it for you. LuaJIT is less slow than the regular interpreter. This does not mean that Lua is fast. You could make a bad C compiler. This does not mean that C is slow.

Then why the fuck did you cherrypick the worst Lua interpreter?

>You could make a bad C compiler. This does not mean that C is slow.
If everybody would suddenly use that compiler, would you then claim that C is slow?

Used to use it to fuck around in Garry's Mod as a kid.

>array index starts at 1

no thanks

That's why I posted this except I forgot to mention some of its features.

First of all they're not arrays. Second of all, why should they start at 0?

I didn't.

No, I wouldn't. Existing C compilers would continue to exist and be faster so it's a ludicrous hypothetical anyway. Look user, I'm not sure what you don't understand about "LuaJIT is less slow than the standard Lua interpreter, but overall it's still slow". I'm not sure I can put it any more simply than that.

Who the fuck told you LuaJIT is slow? It's buttery smooth.

but that's the right way to do it

Being "buttery smooth" doesn't mean something is fast. A program which takes 10ms to add two numbers would be slow for what it does and yet still appear "buttery smooth" to the human eye.

How about if you just recommend me another interpreted language if you say that Lua is a slow scripting language instead with these arguments?

Most scripting languages are slow.

Then why are you mentioning this if all scripting languages are slow?

lol no, why would I ever consider using a weakly typed garbage language that has no particular use apart from vidyas?

This, or is he going to shift the goalpost again.
Which one isn't (note that scripting language in this context implies dynamic so you don't shift the goalpost again)

>syntax
If you have some LISP experience Tcl syntax suddenly makes more sense, but it can get obtues at time.
It's a command language, every line is a command, and the first word is the command to do, the rest are arguments.
I used to hate its guts but after starting SICP it really brought me around, and I can now appreciate what Tcl is doing. I won't bug you to give it another try, but it's not so bad.
Coming to think of it, now, you can also use a Scheme implementation as your scripting extension language.
>Performance
From what I've been able to find lua DOES have better performance, however, if you do the heavy lifting with your C library, I don't think it should be that pronounced.
So what's more expensive (in your scope)? Programmer hours or processor cycles?

Because the original claim was that Lua is a "high performance language".

You're really upset that I called you out on shifting the goalposts, aren't you? You turn around and accuse me of doing it, but I haven't.

>has no particular use apart from vidyas?
There's your answer.

>Because the original claim was that Lua is a "high performance language".
Compared to other scripting languages, not all sorts of languages. Ok?

It's a similar story to JavaScript. Some people learn it so they can tinker with their favorite game, and then refuse to learn any other programming language ever. This is how we ended up with Node.js and Love2d.

If you don't want weakly typed it's just not for you.
It appears you don't like your own comparison tactics to be used against you. Kek. Also, since you still don't have the balls to compare property
>"Luajit is less slow"
have a link luajit.org/performance_x86.html
>yfw >64x faster in some cases
Keep goalpost shifting my friend
This

Yes.

Hey larppers nice thread full of buzzwords

>I don't understand what these people are talking about

>Buzzwords
Did you even read? This thread is mostly autistic arguing

These have real-life usages, not for LARPing.

based

The guy doesn't know what he's talking about. LuaJIT's performance is excellent. To the point that dipping into the CAPI reduces performance.

I don't know about a distinction between Lua and LuaJIT so I just wrote Lua. Tcl has the worst performance of the three, though.

>have a link luajit.org/performance_x86.html
Being 64x faster than Lua in at least one case is indeed less slow. Regardless, it doesn't mean that LuaJIT is fast in an overall sense.
>Keep goalpost shifting my friend
Given the frequency with which you deploy that accusation and that nothing you have targeted it at has been an instance of goalpost shifting, I'm going to assume that you don't know what it means.

This, the FFI performs well but still reduces performance.
Only a little difference but it is mostly just a different runtime.

>Projecting this hard
Never change user.
I didn't even imply that. It's just how FFI is. Nothing can really be faster than compiled languages for obvious reasons.

Only for my minecraft computer mods.

You can start them at 0 when it's useful to you.

actually writing a program that embeds lua right now
lua's ezpz

I got used to this in minutes.

Sadly this fucks up the table length operator and ipairs starts at one if I remember right. So you can put something at index zero but it might not work as expected.

So start your tables at 1. I don't see why it's so important for them to be at 0.

Agreed. I just wish Lua was more flexible here. But it probably isn't practical.

>metatable autism
>1-indexing
>light/userdata
Oof.
Imma just use a scheme.

It's pretty nice. The two things wrong with it are of course the array indexing thing, and I wish OOP was a little more straightforward, but it's just boilerplate to get the OOP rolling so whatever.

>claims lua jit is slow
>gets asked for proof
>chimps out and refuses to answer the question
>probably because his basedboy language benchmark site won't bench it

they insert this evil shit:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closure_(computer_programming)
, red guidrant

Lua syntax is fine as long as you never fall for the gotchas.

The 1 indexing is pretty rough but then you mostly don't use not-arrays in that manner. The metatable autism is fugly but its super useful.

>using something designed by HUEHUEs
Not even once.

>metatable autism
It allows implementing your own flavor of polymorphism among other things without complicating the runtime. It's actually one of the major reasons Lua is so jit friendly.
>1-indexing
I personally don't like it but it's not too bad.
>light/userdata
Light userdata is not very useful IMO but there are limited cases where it is useful. If you don't want it just use userdata. Just to be sure, you understand that having a userdata like type isn't possible to avoid in a dynamic language that binds to c. Perhaps you just don't like how it is done? Very unclear. It is annoying that getting the type of some userdata always returns "userdata" so libs often implement a getter to get the real name.
Many languages support this to varying degrees.
Personally, I wish they didn't use keywords as part of the syntax like "then" and "end"

>Many languages support this to varying degrees.
Only shit lisp_tards infected langiages

Keywords are legit easier to parse visually than random brackets and shit. Would be a good place to implement labelled blocks or something though.

Pretty nice for gamedev with love2d
Some things about it annoy me though, like indexing starting at 1, and the lack of a += operator

You would like Moonscript

Nah

>Lack of +=
This. It just makes things easier to read.

I do.
>tfw learned programming through Lua because WoW addons
>tfw learning programming by playing a game

Attached: 1333820396382.jpg (340x346, 23K)

LuaJIT is extremely fast. Comparable to C or Java as long as you don't write code which is too dynamic.

I never got anywhere with WoW addons, its used for addons on lots of things though.