Tcl vs. Lua
in [TCL]
|
Prev: tclBlend for Windows
Next: launching wish from tclsh
From: Lisa Pearlson on 29 Dec 2005 07:29 Coincidentally I came across Lua ( http://lua.org ). Seems their goals, portability, embeddability, extendability, are similar to Tcl. Just like Tcl, I had never heard of Lua, but they claim it to be simple, fast, etc. So, I can't help wonder how Tcl compares to Lua. Does anyone here know Lua? I'm sure each has their strengths and weaknesses. I'm only interested in what are Tcl's advantages over Lua. Lisa
From: Cameron Laird on 29 Dec 2005 09:08 In article <1135859377.142907.11560(a)g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Lisa Pearlson <reageer(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >Coincidentally I came across Lua ( http://lua.org ). >Seems their goals, portability, embeddability, extendability, are >similar to Tcl. >Just like Tcl, I had never heard of Lua, but they claim it to be >simple, fast, etc. > >So, I can't help wonder how Tcl compares to Lua. >Does anyone here know Lua? I'm sure each has their strengths and >weaknesses. I'm only interested in what are Tcl's advantages over Lua. > >Lisa > Tcl constitutes a far richer programming environment. Lua is more minimal in its run-time impact. Tcl supports Unicode and regular expressions more fully than Lua. Tcl has Starpacks, stubs, and so on. Tcl/Tk is ahead of TkLua. There are more Tcl books. Some prefer EIAS to the impressive mileage Lua gets out of dictionary-based metaprogramming. Lua's a wonderful language. It also remains a niche language. Tcl comes much closer to universality.
From: Isaac Gouy on 29 Dec 2005 11:52 Cameron Laird wrote: > In article <1135859377.142907.11560(a)g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, > Lisa Pearlson <reageer(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >Coincidentally I came across Lua ( http://lua.org ). > >Seems their goals, portability, embeddability, extendability, are > >similar to Tcl. > >Just like Tcl, I had never heard of Lua, but they claim it to be > >simple, fast, etc. > > > >So, I can't help wonder how Tcl compares to Lua. > >Does anyone here know Lua? I'm sure each has their strengths and > >weaknesses. I'm only interested in what are Tcl's advantages over Lua. > > > >Lisa > > > > Tcl constitutes a far richer programming environment. > Lua is more minimal in its run-time impact. > > Tcl supports Unicode and regular expressions more fully > than Lua. > > Tcl has Starpacks, stubs, and so on. > > Tcl/Tk is ahead of TkLua. > > There are more Tcl books. > > Some prefer EIAS to the impressive mileage Lua gets out > of dictionary-based metaprogramming. > > Lua's a wonderful language. It also remains a niche > language. Tcl comes much closer to universality. EIAS?
From: billposer on 29 Dec 2005 13:10 Cameron Laird wrote: >Tcl supports Unicode and regular expressions more fully >than Lua. Indeed, strictly speaking Lua doesn't have regular expressions at all. It has pattern matching with some wildcards and character classes but it lacks both alternation (e.g. cat|dog) and closure of subexpressions (e.g. (ab)*). Some things can be made to work in UTF-8 since Lua is 8-bit clean but the short answer regarding Unicode support is that it doesn't. There is a library that provides alternative string functions that work with UTF-8. If you need to do a wee bit of Unicode you can probably make it work but Lua is not designed to make Unicode easy. For details see: http://lua-users.org/wiki/LuaUnicode.
From: Cameron Laird on 29 Dec 2005 14:08
In article <1135875168.465905.247530(a)g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, Isaac Gouy <igouy(a)yahoo.com> wrote: . . . >> Some prefer EIAS to the impressive mileage Lua gets out >> of dictionary-based metaprogramming. >> >> Lua's a wonderful language. It also remains a niche >> language. Tcl comes much closer to universality. > >EIAS? > <URL: http://wiki.tcl.tk/14086 > |