Lua.
Alastair Lynn
Title says it all really. Python was proving to be a major pain and
broke lots of stuff. So: I changed to Lua instead. It's a much smaller
codebase, and I've already got basic bindings between it and the
engine written.
It's in the git repository now.
-Alastair
Adam
Adam
tycho
have you considered ruby? it is more like python, with the added
simplicity of lua. i believe it would be worth the extra effort to
swap over.
nice comparison:
http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/234812
language home:
http://ruby-lang.org/
embedding into c++:
http://metaeditor.sourceforge.net/embed/
Adam
Alastair Lynn
Ruby is slow, and ruby is extremely difficult to embed.
Not worth the effort.
Alastair
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Xsera Development" group.
> To post to this group, send email to xser...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to xsera-dev+...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/xsera-dev?hl=en
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>
tycho
if lua is like c, then ruby is like objective c.
this makes it appear slower because it can do a hell of a lot more
than what lua can.
anyway, good luck guys... i think
On Nov 24, 11:53 pm, Alastair Lynn <arpl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My reply to that is very simple: absolutely not.
>
> Ruby is slow, and ruby is extremely difficult to embed.
>
> Not worth the effort.
>
> Alastair
>
> On 24 Nov 2008, at 02:23, tycho wrote:
>
>
>
> > hi guys.
> > have you considered ruby? it is more like python, with the added
> > simplicity of lua. i believe it would be worth the extra effort to
> > swap over.
>
> > nice comparison:
> >http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/234812
>
> > language home:
> >http://ruby-lang.org/
>
> > embedding into c++:
> >http://metaeditor.sourceforge.net/embed/
>
> > >
>
>
> 5KViewDownload
Adam
Anyways, why are you looking to start up your own adventure? Why not
join ours?
Is.. is it something I said?
Adam
Alastair Lynn
Please don't assume I'm making a sweeping generalisation.
I'm speaking from experience with Ruby, because I struggled for *six
months* to get it integrated with one of my past games at the advice
of someone in whose opinions I have a great deal of trust. Ruby is
really not designed for embedding: the API is awkward, and there is no
namespacing used at all, which meant I had to re-name a great many
internal functions to shoehorn Ruby in there. That was just the start
of my trouble: when things went wrong in Ruby it would crash the
entire game.
Objective-C is not much slower than C: its message passing systems
actually doesn't add a great deal of overhead and the main body of
functions are compiled in machine-code just as C is. Ruby, however, is
benchmarkably slower than Lua by an order of magnitude for some types
of code, particularly with the Lua/LLVM integration I plan to add at a
later date which will allow Lua to emit to native machine code at
runtime. Most of this extra functionality is functionality that we
don't need - Lua is light, extensible, adds little to the compile time
or size of the executable, and provides everything that we need.
I am not biased, I am just concerned with making the game as good as
possible, and for me that means not spending the majority of the time
trying to keep the very weak bridge between Ruby and C++ in one piece
- I'd rather go with Lua, which I know to work, and work quickly.
Alastair
Nick Farley
> I'm speaking from experience with Ruby, because I struggled for *six months*
> to get it integrated with one of my past games at the advice of someone in
> whose opinions I have a great deal of trust.
It was me wasn't it?
> I am not biased, I am just concerned with making the game as good as
> possible, and for me that means not spending the majority of the time trying
> to keep the very weak bridge between Ruby and C++ in one piece - I'd rather
> go with Lua, which I know to work, and work quickly.
>
> Alastair
Seconded. The product needs to be the best we can make it. If that
means using Lua, then so be it. But I can't think of many (if any)
modern OS X apps that use Ruby extensively. While I like Ruby (and
Ruby on Rails), the language is not mature enough for usage outside a
very limited area.
Alastair Lynn
It was Evan Seeds, and the product was MBS, if you remember back that
far. It was meant to be developed after Xenos and before... your
product, if you know what I mean.
Alastair
tycho
http://theocacao.com/document.page/428/
it's not exactly what we are talking about, but i found it while
searching for examples for you, so it looks as though it is. i'd post
quotes, but it really has to be read in context. ie the perl and c, c
and assembly comparisons. same old arguments, different time,
different languages, same end result.
also, 'c++>all'? wtf have you been smoking, adam?
oh well, enough already! this is not productive.
On Nov 26, 3:22 am, Alastair Lynn <arpl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Nick-
>
> It was Evan Seeds, and the product was MBS, if you remember back that
> far. It was meant to be developed after Xenos and before... your
> product, if you know what I mean.
>
> Alastair
>
> On 25 Nov 2008, at 17:19, Nick Farley wrote:
>
>
>
> >> I'm speaking from experience with Ruby, because I struggled for
> >> *six months*
> >> to get it integrated with one of my past games at the advice of
> >> someone in
> >> whose opinions I have a great deal of trust.
>
> > It was me wasn't it?
>
> >> I am not biased, I am just concerned with making the game as good as
> >> possible, and for me that means not spending the majority of the
> >> time trying
> >> to keep the very weak bridge between Ruby and C++ in one piece -
> >> I'd rather
> >> go with Lua, which I know to work, and work quickly.
>
> >> Alastair
>
> > Seconded. The product needs to be the best we can make it. If that
> > means using Lua, then so be it. But I can't think of many (if any)
> > modern OS X apps that use Ruby extensively. While I like Ruby (and
> > Ruby on Rails), the language is not mature enough for usage outside a
> > very limited area.
>
> > >
> 5KViewDownload
Adam
over your head.
Adam
On Nov 25, 2008, at 4:57 PM, tycho wrote:
> also, 'c++>all'? wtf have you been smoking, adam?
>
adam_0
> But I can't think of many (if any)
> modern OS X apps that use Ruby extensively. While I like Ruby (and
> Ruby on Rails), the language is not mature enough for usage outside a
> very limited area.
their addons. It's very straightforward, and I don't know why we
wouldn't use it.
Ok, 'nuff said.
Adam