Slashdot Mirror


Programming in Lua 2nd Edition

Andre Carregal writes "In the second edition of Programming in Lua Roberto Ierusalimschy presents the Lua programming Language in a simple yet precise format for both novice and advanced programmers." Read the rest of Andre's review. Programming in Lua, 2nd Edition author Roberto Ierusalimschy pages 328 publisher Lua.Org; 2nd edition (March 5, 2006) rating 10 reviewer Andre Carregal ISBN 8590379825 summary Shows how Lua is the language of choice for anyone who needs a scripting language that is simple, efficient, extensible, portable, and free.

The Lua programming language has been around for more than 10 years, but only recently has it started to appear on the mainstream radar screens. It has evolved from a simple scripting language to a full-fledged solution for scripting and embedding. Lua is portable, fast and small, and the language of choice for applications as diverse as games, Web sites and robot controllers as the Lua Users Wiki and LuaForge will confirm.

Lua portability can be shown by the long list of operating systems it runs on, which includes not only Windows and Linux, but also small systems and mobile devices. The memory and CPU requirements for the runtime are really low, and Lua has been used in environments that most other scripting options would not dare go into.

One of the milestones of the history of Lua has been the release of the book Programming in Lua (a.k.a "PiL"), by Roberto Ierusalimschy, in 2003. This review is about the second edition of Programming in Lua, a.k.a. the "Blue PiL" due to the color of its cover.

Lua is free software and can be obtained from its site (www.lua.org). There you will also find the reference manual of the language and the full contents of the first edition of Programming in Lua.

As a disclaimer, let me say that I'm one of the technical reviewers of the book and I have been working with Lua since 1993, most of the time interacting with Roberto Ierusalimschy, even when not working in the same projects as him.

The second edition manages to surpass an already good book in various aspects. The "Blue PiL" presents not only the language itself, but also gives an excellent view of how one could see Lua as the foundation of solid scripting techniques. The original Programming in Lua was focused on Lua 5.0, while the second edition focuses on Lua 5.1. While the differences between Lua 5.0 and 5.1 are not radical, the newer version has a lot more to offer, both in terms of the modularity aspect and of language features. The second edition of Programming in Lua indicates clearly when some concept or detail relates only to a specific version of Lua, but most of the contents can be applied to both Lua versions.

Programming in Lua is oriented to both the novice programmer who wants to get a first feeling for Lua, and to the advanced Lua or C programmer who wants to use the full potential of the language. The book clearly separates the two aspects and indicates the sections that can be skipped for each reader profile. The author manages to keep a light and easily readable style during the whole book and the examples are simple and direct, making the flow of the reading quite pleasant. I can say that, even having some reasonable experience with Lua, I was surprised by a lot of details in the book. The "Blue PiL" is one of those books that you can read many times over, and each time you learn something new.

The "Blue PiL" starts with an overview of the Lua language and slowly evolves through the more advanced concepts and the features that make Lua such a unique language. Even though it's a relatively thin book, it goes from the starting concepts to the more sophisticated ones with a grace that is really rare to find. The one other book that comes to mind with an effect like this is the classical Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs by Harold Abelson and Gerald Jay Sussman, which says a lot.

The first part of the book presents the language and the basic features. In particular, concepts such as iterators, coroutines and closures are presented in a clear way, which is no small feat considering that many readers will be having contact with such concepts for the first time.

One of the strong points of Lua is its simplicity, but don't assume that this implies lack of power. An example of this balance is the table data structure, in fact the only data structure for Lua. Tables allow the construction of every other data structure (arrays, sets, bags etc) but also allows the use of sophisticated techniques such as metamethods, function environments, modules and object orientation.

In fact, instead of providing every feature one might want to use, Lua provides the meta mechanisms so you can create your own features, or use them as modules created by third parties. In order to explain the full power of these meta mechanisms the second part of the book takes the reader from the basic steps of creating a table and shows how each of the mechanisms can add features or help the usage of some advanced concepts.

As an example, the chapter on object-oriented programming not only shows how to use objects in Lua, but also how to think of objects as prototypes for other objects, and how to implement inheritance on such a model without using anything too fancy.

There are also chapters on the use of metatables (basically tables that define the behavior of other tables), the use of tables as function environments (a really powerful mechanism once understood), modules and finally weak tables. Weak tables allow the advanced use of memory resources in an automatic way, providing mechanisms for data structures that tend to be hard to implement in other languages, if even possible at all.

This slow but efficient presentation of concepts that, though complex, can be easily assimilated by the reader is a predominant aspect of Roberto's work. He is not only a skilled author but also knows how to present things in a way that a novice can grasp and an expert can master.

The third part of Programming in Lua covers all the language libraries (math, table, string, system, debug and I/O) in clear prose and shows that even with a small set of libraries Lua can pack a lot of power on a very small footprint.

Finally, the last part of the book is directed to programmers that want to use Lua to its full potential. Lua can be used as an extension language or as an embedded language, and knowing how to interact with the host language (C, C++, Java, Delphi etc.) is mandatory for that. The book presents the C API for Lua in the same progressive pace, but also manages to cover every ground needed so one can add Lua to a project without much pain, if any.

One important thing to note about the book is that it follows the same philosophy that guides the language, showing that simplicity and lightness has nothing to do with lack of power or coverage.

I really recommend this book to anyone interested in learning Lua, and also for those who already know how to use Lua but would like to fully master its way of thinking, the so called "Lua way" of doing things. The book has been considered by many as an excellent guide on programming, even if one is not interested in Lua in particular."

You can purchase Programming in Lua, 2nd Edition from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

31 of 131 comments (clear)

  1. As opposed to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
    > "Roberto Ierusalimschy presents the Lua programming Language in a simple yet precise format for both novice and advanced programmers."

    Of course, if you grew up with a last name like "Ierusalimschy", reading Perl aloud is probably pretty old hat for you. For that matter, so are APL and Brainf*ck.

    1. Re:As opposed to... by k4_pacific · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah, no kidding, Ierusalimschy isn't a name, it's a bad Scrabble hand.

      --
      Unknown host pong.
    2. Re:As opposed to... by Raenex · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Who's "we", and when did they elect you to speak for them?

  2. Perfect... by T.Louis · · Score: 2, Informative

    ... for the Burning Crusade expansion of World of Warcraft (Lua 5.1) and customized UIs!

    1. Re:Perfect... by jdray · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I really recommend this book to anyone interested in learning Lua, and also for those who already know how to use Lua but would like to fully master its way of thinking, the so called "Lua way" of doing things.

      Every time I see one of these "Learn Language X in Your Spare Time" book reviews, I wonder, "Why another language?" Advancement of languages is good, and "new" languages like Ruby are great, but how many programming languages are we as a community going to produce? Like text editors, it would be better to focus on fewer targets and add features than keep coming up with new "my toolbox grew so big I created a compiler for it" languages.

      Of course, I may just be trollish today. Hard to tell.

      --
      The Spoon
      Updated 6/28/2011
    2. Re:Perfect... by AncientWarrior · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Every time I see one of these "Learn Language X in Your Spare Time" book reviews, I wonder, "Why another language?" Advancement of languages is good, and "new" languages like Ruby are great, but how many programming languages are we as a community going to produce? Like text editors, it would be better to focus on fewer targets and add features than keep coming up with new "my toolbox grew so big I created a compiler for it" languages.

      I think that what you say really does apply to a number of languages -- python, ruby, php etc -- but lua really is something else -- small, elegant, and powerful, like scheme and C in their respective domains, but with some strikingly original constructs. Well worth the study.

    3. Re:Perfect... by alienmole · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Like text editors, it would be better to focus on fewer targets and add features

      The history of programming languages shows that this is a good way to kill a language. Languages are a delicate balance between enabling you to express things, and preventing you from expressing things. You can't just throw the kitchen sink in there and expect the result to be usable. People design new programming languages because they perceive limitations in the ones they already know, limitations that often can't just be overcome by adding features.

      From a programmer's point of view, a good reason to learn a new language is to expand your mental horizons. It can be a passable substitute for actually studying computer science (which you clearly haven't done, if you're asking "why another language?") Don't just learn an array of similar languages, like Python and Ruby. If you already know a popular OO language, then learn a language like Scheme, ML, or Erlang, or if you really want some nerdy metaphorical hair on your chest, learn Haskell (although you might want to start with one of the others first). Then you'll understand "why another language".

    4. Re:Perfect... by Cthefuture · · Score: 4, Insightful

      For starters Lua is older than Ruby so be sure to point your finger in the right direction. Lua was already at 1.0 when Matz starting thinking about Ruby.

      But Lua is different than those other languages anyway. It's extremely small, both as a language and as a binary. It's also easy to embed anywhere you need it. And finally it's pretty fast as far as dynamic languages go.

      Lua doesn't get enough credit these days. It's used in tons of products (especially games) but most of the time people don't realize they are using it.

      --
      The ratio of people to cake is too big
  3. ref book online by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Every page has a donation or Amazon link...
    Anyways the ref book is online:
    http://www.lua.org/manual/5.1/

  4. Moo by Chacham · · Score: 3, Interesting
    As a disclaimer, let me say that I'm one of the technical reviewers of the book and I have been working with Lua since 1993, most of the time interacting with Roberto Ierusalimschy, even when not working in the same projects as him.

    Disclaimer or not, should he be allowed as a reviewer?

    Hmm, the Review Guidelines state
    Important: If you have a relationship (other than as an ordinary reader) to the author or publisher of a book you're reviewing, disclose that relationship. This means not only cases like "My brother, the author, has given me a million dollars to type this review, and is holding me at gunpoint, while dictating to me from the Amazon review he himself wrote," but also "I used to work at this book's publisher, and was a technical reviewer for this book's three chapters on networking," or "The author is a good friend of mine." Better to disclose more than you think necessary (it can always be edited out if sensible; we'll let you know if we think there's an inappropriate conflict of interest) than less than actually necessary. If in doubt, please speak up.
    So, it OK according to the guidelines. Though, i'd wonder if someone so involved is a good person to actually write such a review.

  5. Re:Just what the world needs by vashfish · · Score: 5, Informative

    A toy programming language used (possibly unwittingly) by at LEAST 7,000,000 people, thanks to World of Warcraft...

  6. hello world by DohnJoe · · Score: 5, Funny

    as a short introduction to the LUA language I present here the code for a hello world app:

    print "Hello world"

    hope that helps...

    1. Re:hello world by Shados · · Score: 4, Funny

      Thanks, now with this newfound knowledge in mind, I can add on my resume "Intermediate LUA developer"

    2. Re:hello world by jhoger · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No it's
      print ("Hello, world.")

      Reader's Digest guide to Lua:

      -1) I believe it's 'Lua' not LUA
      0) You need the parentheses on function calls.
      a) Only data structure is hash tables
      b) Hash tables with positive integer indexes emulate arrays (order is maintained)
      c) Positive integer indexed hash tables are one-based. Gawd. This makes for some serious unpleasantness if you want to embed Lua in your C application, since many real world things are 0 based and probably all the patterns you know for writing proper loops in C are zero based. They wanted to make things simple, but they got this one dead wrong. Someone should make a zero-based fork.
      d) No continue statement for loops
      e) No semicolon separator
      f) Iterators
      g) Cool cooperative multitasking support
      h) Closures
      i) An extremely quirky stack based interface to C. Some api's pop their arguments some don't. They should do it the Forth way (words consume their arguments) or not automatically pop anything. Pick one, not both. And please, some simple stack operators (swap, drop, dup, roll, etc.)
      j) Perlish do-it-yourself objects
      k) Not-quite-regex string processing support. Come on, at least make it a subset of proper RE's, don't put a new syntax.
      l) Implicit dereferencing

      I'm probably missing something...

      -- John.

  7. Plua: Lua on a Palm Pilot by HoneyBeeSpace · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you want to geek out a bit and program Lua on your Palm, you may do so: http://netpage.em.com.br/mmand/plua.htm

  8. Re:DOA - the license sucks. by planetoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How so? Last I checked, anyone is free to modify Lua to their heart's content and include the modified Lua VM in their program, and they can choose whether or not to release the source. That's even more free than what the GPL states, if you consider Lua's domain. Remember, Lua has been and is still used by many game developers who don't necessarily want modifications done to their games (or at least to their games' code, if not the data), and Lua would probably have failed in that market if it had a restrictive, bossy license like the GPL behind it. Lua is anything but DOA.

    --
    Slashdot requires you to wait longer between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment.
  9. Programming *in* the Lua by Blrfl · · Score: 5, Funny

    Read the article again, and this time remember that "lua" is a word the Hawaiians use for the bathroom.

  10. Celestia by Fallingcow · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you need a reason to learn Lua, look no farther than Celestia.

    Lua is the more powerful of the two scripting languages that can be used with Celestia. You can do some awesome stuff with it, and there are lots of examples on various forums (fora?) devoted to Celestia scripting. Good times.

  11. lua uses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.lua.org/uses.html list an impressive amount of project (many of them games) using lua.

  12. It is an excellent book by mhackarbie · · Score: 4, Informative
    I don't have any association with the author or the other creators of the language, so perhaps my opinion will add some legitimate support for the book and the language. I developed my previous project (Ribosome Builder) with Lua and found it to be very stable, easy-to-use, small, fast and powerful. That said, I was eagerly looking forward to the release of this next edition of the book, because I'm using Lua again for my current projects, and hope to make even better use of Lua 5.1. I'm especially excited about the new support for modules, and also the fact that Lua is now supported by SWIG. Previously, I had to do a lot of manual hacking to define the interface functions between my core code (in C++) and the lua scripts.

    I've read about 3/4 of the book so far and I completely agree with the reviewer's assessment. It's very cleanly and clearly written, with many things explained in a concise and elegant style. For example, Ierusalimschy's explanation of closures allowed me to immediately grasp them and appreciate why they are useful. I remember reading about them way back years ago in Larry Wall's book 'Programming Perl', and was remained rather confused about the concept. I don't know if the additional years of experience helped, but the clear style of the Lua book certainly did.

    Using a scripting language for enhancing and extending a complex project just seems to be a given for most serious projects these days, and after surveying the field, I considered only two main choices: Python and Lua. Python is also really well designed and powerful, but I decided to go with Lua because it does pretty much everything I need it to do, does it very well, but best of all, it is so very small. These days when even the most basic projects can quickly grow into complex, interconnected monstrosities with a zillion dependencies, I believe that the values of small and simple are more important than ever. So for that reason especially, I'm really excited about Lua and the prospect for using it more effectively after I finish swallowing this Blue PIL.

    mhack

    --
    Building a better ribosome since 1997
  13. Re:DOA - the license sucks. by Goaway · · Score: 2, Informative

    Wow, that's the most brain-washed open-source zealot response I've seen in a while. Do you even understand the "free as in beer" line at all? Apparently not.

    If it really, really, really bothers you that Lua doesn't have enough restrictions on distribution, you are quite free to download a copy, stick a GPL license on it, and use that. How about that?

  14. with apologies to steve taylor by stoolpigeon · · Score: 4, Funny

    Chacham Cow
    It was a morning just like any other morning
    In the Sinai desert, 1200 B.S. (Before Slashdot)
    It glistened, it glowed, it rose from the gold of the children of Israel ...and most of the adults
    The chacham cow!
    The golden chacham cow had a body like the great cows of ancient Egypt
    And a face like the face of Cowboy Neal ...without the horns
    And through the centuries it has roamed the earth
    Like a ravenous bovine
    Seeking whom it may lick
    chacham cow!
    From the valley of the shadow of fark
    To the on-line gambling boutique
    From the depths of youtube
    To the custom style sheet
    The chacham cow lurks
    The chacham cow lurks
    Who loves you, baby?
    Who'll give you good karma?
    Who says you'll regret it?
    Aaa-ooooooo
    Who loves you, baby?
    Who'll give you mod points?
    Who says you'll regret it?
    Aaa-aaa-aaa-ooooooo
    I was in love and I needed the clicks
    And then I needed more clicks
    I was filthy rich and all I wanted were more page views ...and a few more clicks
    Woe to you, proud mortal
    Secure in your modest digs
    You think you're immune?
    You, who couldn't finger said cow in a police line-up with the three little pigs!
    chacham cow!
    Master of disguises!
    Who's gonna change shape at will?
    Who's the eye on the pyramid on the back of the dollar bill?
    Who loves power lunchin' from boing-boing to digg?
    Who loves you, baby?
    chacham cow comin' to get ya
    Why?
    Cuz you think this is stupid, don't you?
    The chacham cow will not be mocked!
    The chacham cow's planning a coup!
    The chacham cow chews cud bigger than you!
    Woe, woe, woe to you
    Who blow off this warning
    Perhaps you've already been licked
    I, too, was hypnotized
    By those big cow eyes
    The last time I uttered those four little words
    "I deserve better editors!"

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
  15. languages as tools by Phantom+of+the+Opera · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The 'neat' thing about this language seems to be its easy memoization of functions. That would make it a good choice for programs that do certain kinds of calculations (and by the look of it, calculations that tend to be used in games).

    Any of these 'new language X' are written to tackle a particular problem set. Would you use perl or C do to string munging? Would you use perl or Fortran to do fast and heavy number crunching? Being aware of what languages are out there may save you time when you encounter a particular problem.

    I saw bring the new languages on. At the very least, their useful bits will be incorporated into a future perl release.

    1. Re:languages as tools by radtea · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Would you use perl or Fortran to do fast and heavy number crunching?

      Incredibly, there is a rather good 4th order Runge-Kutta ODE solver available in Perl. I used it once because I wanted something quick and dirty, and expected performance would be terrible, but when I later translated it into C++ I had to squeeze pretty hard to get more than a factor of two speed increase. And the difference between C++ and FORTRAN is less than a factor of two for most applications these days (although I do confess to missing FORTRAN's optimized exponentiation.)

      Furthermore, with decent regex and string classes available for every language under the sun (except FORTRAN, of course...) there is less and less reason to prefer one language over another, and even less reason for people to go mad and write their own. And if you really need the performance of LAPACK in FORTRAN then you can call into it from C++ easily enough.

      If one is writing applications, then it is very hard to beat C++, especially given the number of excellent cross-platform application frameworks (I'm currently very happy with wxWidgets, but have used Qt heavily in the past). For scripting one has a wide range of viable choices: perl, python, Java... These are all well-supported, have large user bases, and while they are unsuitable for serious application development for a number of reasons, they all do the sorts of things we want scripting languages to do: runtime optimization, garbage collection (admittedly broken in many JVMs, but working well in perl and python), and adequate cross-platform support.

      So in this environment, new languages are more of an irritant than anything else, perhaps useful for their experimental value, but if you really want new features in perl or whatever, then the best way to get them there is to work on the development of that language, not re-capitulate everything with an almost-completely-but-not-quite-identically similar syntax. Given that perl 6 is near-as-damnit a new language anyway, this is a particularly auspicious time for such endeavours.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    2. Re:languages as tools by Bastian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I hate to burst your bubble, but if C++, Perl, Python, and Java are really such solid languages that there's no reason why any programmer would want anything else, then the world is screwed. Furthermore, adding new features to existing languages really isn't the solution - that path leads to madness, to kitchen-sink monstrosities like C++ and Perl. Both of them have traveled so far beyond the pale that their creators have admitted the desire to more or less start over and make a cleaner language that does the same thing.

      While I know this is a strained metaphor, when you're trying to do serious work a box of tools is better than a swiss army knife. That's part of the genius behind .Net and the reason why Mono started - with an environment where you can write different modules in different languages and not have to care quite so much about the boundaries between them, you really are free to use the best tool for the job. This is also why embedded languages are getting so popular - yeah, I can do everything I need to do in ObjC, but damn is it nice to be able to save myself a crapload of time by doing all the "big picture" work in something like Lua or F-Script. Nor do I find either to be an irritant - F-Script produced a drastic improvement in my productivity and the maintainability of my code, and now that I'm learning Lua I'm loving it for similar reasons. I'll probably keep using both because each is best for slightly different things.

  16. Lua = moon by Z80a · · Score: 2, Interesting

    in brazil,from where this script language come from,lua = moon

  17. PiL is the best language book I have ever read by raaum · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Even if you have no plans to actually program in Lua, you should get this book as an example of how a technical book can and should be written!

    While the novice programmer can certainly pick this book up and learn to program (and it is perfectly suited to that), the examples, asides, and discussion in each chapter contain gems for the intermediate to advanced programmer. Everytime I look something up I see a new depth to some language feature or example I didn't see the first time around.

    I use Lua because it is incredibly easy to both extend lua with either C or C++ libraries as well as embed lua in my C/C++/ObjC/whatever programs

  18. What make LUA a very potent scripting language by slonik · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well, the first reaction of many people might be
    "O no, yet another scripting language finds it way from the obscurity into the lame light". Do we need an extra one if we already have Ruby, Python, Perl, Tcl, Scheme. And I say -- YES, Lua has its place, it is not redundant, it is not "me too" language. And here is why.

    I have been expert Ruby coder for the last 5 years using Ruby for data modelling, extensive scripting, wrote load-balancing scripts, Rails Web development, binding C++ libraries to Ruby using SWIG, you name it.

    Six month ago I got involved in LUA and I totally fell in love with it.
    What does make a beautiful programming language? Lots of features? wealth of libraries? simplicity of it? I think that language design is more art than science and the language beauty is the careful balance of features, simplicity, semantics, uniformity, etc. Like in a masterpiece painting it is the balance of color, shapes, motives and composition.

    C, for example, ia a beautiful language in the category of "portable assemblers". In that category C is powerful thanks to its libraries, simple and easily implementable thanks to its syntax and semantics, portable due to very clever and clean hardware abstraction.

    I think that Lua is to "high level scripting languages" is what C is to "portable assemblers". Lua has both OO and functional programming very naturally represented in its semantics. All objects are first class (including functions). Lua is small, very fast (in fact fastest scripting language according to http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/), has very good Virtual Machine, incremental Garbage Collector. As far as fundamantals are concerned, Lua is light-years ahead of Ruby. It still lags behind in library support, but the recent progress is very encouraging.

    Anyway, give Lua a try. You will love it. Lua is nice, its codebase is tiny (about 10K lines). It runs on anything that support ANSI C compiler including embedded stuff (ARM, Palm, Cell phones, MIPS, x86, etc).

  19. Re:data description language; Lua vs Guile by SimHacker · · Score: 2, Informative

    Absolutely: The Lua interpreter source code is very clean and well written, and wonderfully portable and platform agnostic.

    Here's the source code that you can view online -- there isn't much to it! Four global header files, 19 core C files, 19 core header files, 10 library C files, 1 interpreter C file, and 2 compiler C files. Here is the main loop of the virtual machine -- notice that there are only 38 opcodes!

    A great example of some interesting code written in Lua is the Auctioneer add-on for World of Warcraft (screenshots, manual). Here's the index of the Lua sources, and an interesing Lua file that calculates statistics on auction items. This code depends on features provided by the WOW client (implemented in C++ or whatever), as well as other Lua scripts loaded into the client.

    One important reason to learn and consider using Lua, is that it's by far one of the fastest and smallest of all the interpreted scripting languages, on the Programming Language Shootout. It totally smokes most other scripting languages.

    Here are the ratios of interpreted languages compared to compiled C code, in order of SPEED (the number is how many times slower it is than C, smaller is better unless you make your living by wasting time):
    Lua: 6.4; Python: 7.4; Pike: 8.3; Tcl: 8.7; Perl: 9.0; Scheme MzScheme: 11; PHP: 13; Icon: 14; Smalltalk GST: 15; Ruby: 16; JavaScript SpiderMonkey: 32;

    Here are the ratios of interpreted languages compared to compiled C code, in order of SIZE (the number is how many times bigger it is than C, smaller is better unless you make your living by selling memory):
    Lua: 2.5; Haskell GHC: 2.8; SML MLton: 3.4; Python: 4.1; Perl: 4.3; Tcl: 5.1; Icon: 5.4; Ruby: 6.0; C# Mono: 6.3; Pike: 6.8; PHP: 7.1; Oberon-2 OO2C: 7.9; Erlang HiPE: 7.9; Java JDK -server: 9.1; Scheme MzScheme: 9.2; Mozart/Oz: 9.8; Scala: 10; Lisp SBCL: 10; Smalltalk GST: 13; Smalltalk VisualWorks: 15; JavaScript SpiderMonkey: 30;

    Lua is even better than several compiled languages (like Java) when it comes to its size! Like Java, Lua also has a "just in time" compiler, but that was not used in these benchmarks (although I presume Java's was, because Java did very well with speed but not memory usage).

    I think it's laughable that someone would put their time into learning a faddishly popular language like Ruby, but would then not consider learning a technically superior language like Lua, since Ruby scores so badly on these benchmarks compared to Lua, Lua has been around a lot longer than Ruby, and it had already proven itself in many commercial products (like WOW).

    Lua really is far ahead of the pack of other languages in many ways, BECAUSE it's so clean and well designed. Plus its licensing terms are excellent, it's extremely portable, easy to embed and integrate with applications, and SWIG supports it well. So it's definitely well worth learning.

    -Don

    --
    Take a look and feel free: http://www.PieMenu.com
  20. Re:Just what the world needs by UncleSocks · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually a really elegant embeddable language. On previous products I've created I've embbbeded TCL, Python, LISP and FORTH. Lua is more elegant and almost as small as a FORTH kernel. I assure you Lua is already in at least three very propular products.

  21. Why Another Language? by crucini · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think Lua's main selling point is ease of embedding. When you write a large C++ application, you frequently end up wanting some embedded scripting language.
    Some interpreters, like Perl, are tricky to embed. Lua is very friendly to embedding. You can call user-defined Lua functions from C and call C functions from Lua.

    The interpreter is small, and the language is sandboxable - for instance, you could have untrusted Lua running in your webserver and it would have no access to I/O or filesystem.