Brandon,

On 11/28/07, Brandon Van Every <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> - better scoping

- higher quality, outsourced documentation

- outsource core language bugs
> - popularity boost for 5 years

- some advanced programming constructs gained


I certainly can't debate those (unless CMake developers make significant
changes to the core LUA libraries).

Is backward compatibility with the current language a goal of the LUA
experiment?  I ask because the examples spoken of on this list appear to be
trying to mimic the current CMake syntax.

Thanks,
George.
_______________________________________________
CMake mailing list
CMake@cmake.org
http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake

Reply via email to