I just tried and on my other linux VM geanylua with the PR runs with Lua 5.4 without any modifications needed.
I'm not really convinced by the performance argument - I just don't see how anyone would notice. The whole Geany except Scintilla lexers and ctags parsers could be written in a scripting language and I don't think anyone would notice any performance difference. (And, and this is probably just a personal preference, by adding JIT you make from a nice little interpreter a beast which introduces its own set of problems like CPU/OS/architecture dependence. I'm not sure how LuaJIT's JIT works but since most of the scripts will be short-running, it could make the execution of the scripts slower if it performs JIT compilation every time and doesn't store the precompiled binary somewhere. IMO, the only language where JIT makes sense is javascript in web browsers, but anywhere else where you need the performance, it's best to go with the native code.) Regarding compatibility, yes, that could be an argument. But I suspect users of this plugin will use it for smaller utilities related to their workflow and they won't use any advanced features from the language where they might see differences. Anyway, my personal preference would be using pure Lua but I'm fine if others have a different opinion and the LuaJIT patch gets merged. -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/geany/geany-plugins/issues/1133#issuecomment-1455246813 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <geany/geany-plugins/issues/1133/1455246...@github.com>
