Em 15-08-2012 03:40, Benjamin Smedberg escreveu:
> On 8/15/2012 2:24 AM, Pedro Bessa wrote:
>> I thought all fast functional programming languages were
>> Lisp dialects, but that's not true and you can use other fast
>> functional programming languages, but now that you said
>> Rust, I think the programming language that you should use
>> must be ready for prime time, in other words, not alpha, so
>> Rust can't be used.
> Pedro, are you trolling or serious? We are designing Rust to meet our
> specific needs for a functional programming language because none of
> the existing languages were suitable candidates, especially about
> native compiled speed, C interop, and strong typesafety.
> Rewriting our codebase in a functional language is not a short-term
> operation: it's worth doing right.
Lua is good in native compiled speed and C interop. Lua
has closures, prototypal OO, modules and I never heard
complaints about Lua's modules. I think you don't need
traditional OO, but If you experiment with no traditional
OO and it fails, Lua lets you have traditional OO and
choose between single or multiple inheritance.
Mozilla wants many more contributors to the Firefox
would find Lua source code familiar, so you can turn your
very many add-on authors into very many contributors to
the Firefox source code.
You should start writing Lua code, stop writing C++ code
and when your internal pressure makes you feel like
rewriting old C++ code in Lua, just do it.
The official C book is short. An official Lua book is short too
and the other official Lua book is a reference manual. If
you curious about Lua's art with OO, you can download or
buy Programming in Lua and Lua Reference Manual from