From: Kevin Smith <kevinbsmith@...>
Date: 2001-10-24T03:43:03+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:23067] Re: Ruby compared to....

--- Jose Rodriguez <tub4jxr@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I understand that there is no 'best language'
> for all situations but that each has its own 
> forays into being the right choice for a 
> particular task.  Anyone care to comment as
> to Scheme, CAML, LUA, etc.?

I looked into LUA for a while, but never used it. It is
very clean and simple, and takes up very little memory. It
appeals to the minimalist in me. Should be great for
embedding.

However, it is not object oriented, and has a pretty
limited built-in library. There are OO extensions, but they
are more like conventions than being part of the language.
It has some similarities to JavaScript, I believe.

If Ruby didn't exist, I might try to use an extended LUA
for many Ruby tasks. <flameproof>Personally, I think I
would enjoy working in LUA more than I would enjoy working
in Python or Perl.</flameproof>

In one bizarre moment, I even considered trying to write a
Ruby implementation *in* LUA.

Kevin


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com