Lua 5.2

[Milind Gupta]

Hello,

      I was reading in the elua wiki about LTR. To do a comparison between Lua 5.1 and Lua 5.2 I did that on my PC and Lua 5.1 reported 19.4KB while Lua 5.2 reported

14KB so things have improved there. Also the lua_pushcclosure now automatically implements a light c function scheme where the function is just a pointer.

     Considering these 2 changes in Lua 5.2 would it be easy to switch elua to Lua 5.2? I want to run some code on my board that also runs on other devices which are running Lua 5.2.3. I would like to use the exact same core code on the board.

     Any tips and suggestions would be very helpful.

Thanks,
Milind

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[jbsnyder]

Hi Milind,

Thanks for the note on the decreased memory usage.  That would seem to motivate taking a look at this again.  Likewise the 5.3 work releases seem to integrate some features that we've had to bring in from other patches and sources (http://www.lua.org/work/doc/#changes Not sure why that lists bitwise operators though since I think that was in 5.2 as well).

That said, there are some patches like the the LTR patch (http://www.eluaproject.net/doc/master/en_arch_ltr.html) which would have to be ported along with a number of other small patches like modifications to the bytecode dumper.  I'm not sure if anyone has made any effort on this front.

At one point I had broken out the LTR patch against vanilla 5.1 (https://github.com/jsnyder/lua/tree/lua_tiny_ram) which might make it easier to port, but I haven't attempted to keep it current with eLua so it might take some detailed work to ensure a migration without any feature regressions for that patch and others.

It would be nice to keep current with the main Lua sources since as time goes along 5.2 will become more common for users to have installed than 5.1, though distributions like Lua for Windows still haven't released a 5.2-based release (though they also haven't done a release since 2012).

Best.

On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Milind Gupta <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hello,

      I was reading in the elua wiki about LTR. To do a comparison between Lua 5.1 and Lua 5.2 I did that on my PC and Lua 5.1 reported 19.4KB while Lua 5.2 reported

14KB so things have improved there. Also the lua_pushcclosure now automatically implements a light c function scheme where the function is just a pointer.

     Considering these 2 changes in Lua 5.2 would it be easy to switch elua to Lua 5.2? I want to run some code on my board that also runs on other devices which are running Lua 5.2.3. I would like to use the exact same core code on the board.

     Any tips and suggestions would be very helpful.

Thanks,
Milind

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

--

James Snyder
ph: [phone]

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[Milind Gupta]

Hi James,

      Thanks for all the information. Lua for Windows I think now is abandoned in favor of LuaDist. The Lua mailing list favors questions related to 5.2 and if something related to 5.1 comes up they do help but they prompt you to start using 5.2. So I went to 5.2. Also with the 5.3 work also going strong I think its better to change to 5.2 now. 

Regards,

Milind

On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:01 AM, James Snyder <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi Milind,

Thanks for the note on the decreased memory usage.  That would seem to motivate taking a look at this again.  Likewise the 5.3 work releases seem to integrate some features that we've had to bring in from other patches and sources (http://www.lua.org/work/doc/#changes Not sure why that lists bitwise operators though since I think that was in 5.2 as well).

That said, there are some patches like the the LTR patch (http://www.eluaproject.net/doc/master/en_arch_ltr.html) which would have to be ported along with a number of other small patches like modifications to the bytecode dumper.  I'm not sure if anyone has made any effort on this front.

At one point I had broken out the LTR patch against vanilla 5.1 (https://github.com/jsnyder/lua/tree/lua_tiny_ram) which might make it easier to port, but I haven't attempted to keep it current with eLua so it might take some detailed work to ensure a migration without any feature regressions for that patch and others.

It would be nice to keep current with the main Lua sources since as time goes along 5.2 will become more common for users to have installed than 5.1, though distributions like Lua for Windows still haven't released a 5.2-based release (though they also haven't done a release since 2012).

Best.

On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Milind Gupta <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hello,

      I was reading in the elua wiki about LTR. To do a comparison between Lua 5.1 and Lua 5.2 I did that on my PC and Lua 5.1 reported 19.4KB while Lua 5.2 reported

14KB so things have improved there. Also the lua_pushcclosure now automatically implements a light c function scheme where the function is just a pointer.

     Considering these 2 changes in Lua 5.2 would it be easy to switch elua to Lua 5.2? I want to run some code on my board that also runs on other devices which are running Lua 5.2.3. I would like to use the exact same core code on the board.

     Any tips and suggestions would be very helpful.

Thanks,
Milind

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

--

James Snyder
ph: <a href="tel:%28847%29%20448-0386" value="[phone]" target="_blank">[phone]

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev

[Justin Cormack]

On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 5:01 PM, James Snyder <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi Milind,
>
> Thanks for the note on the decreased memory usage.  That would seem to
> motivate taking a look at this again.  Likewise the 5.3 work releases seem
> to integrate some features that we've had to bring in from other patches and
> sources (http://www.lua.org/work/doc/#changes Not sure why that lists
> bitwise operators though since I think that was in 5.2 as well).

In 5.3 they are infix operators, not functions. Much more readable.

Justin
_______________________________________________
eLua-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/elua-dev