any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
32 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Jayanth Acharya
Hi,

Have installed the batteries-included "Lua For Windows", and so far
(about 10 hours into it) am pretty happy with it. However given that
my target platform is Ubuntu Linux (r10.10 in 64-bit to be precise),
doing a simple "sudo apt-get install lua" only seems to have installed
a small 800KB'ish package, so I am guessing that this is barebones
interpreter only. Any tips/pointers on how to get the LFW equivalent
setup on Ubuntu ? Do I have to figure out the corresponding "rocks"
and install those manually, one-by-one ? Isn't there a simpler way ?

~i++

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

steve donovan
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Jayanth Acharya <[hidden email]> wrote:
> and install those manually, one-by-one ? Isn't there a simpler way ?

Actually, there's a lot already in the Debian/Ubuntu repos, e.g. if
you search for liblua5.1* you will get stuff like:

...
i A liblua5.1-socket2              - TCP/UDP socket library for Lua 5.1
p   liblua5.1-sql-doc              - luasql documentation
p   liblua5.1-sql-mysql-2          - luasql library for the Lua language vers
p   liblua5.1-sql-mysql-dev        - luasql development files for the Lua lan
...

steve d.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

David Favro
In reply to this post by Jayanth Acharya
On 03/03/2011 12:08 PM, Jayanth Acharya wrote:
> Have installed the batteries-included "Lua For Windows", and so far
> (about 10 hours into it) am pretty happy with it. However given that
> my target platform is Ubuntu Linux (r10.10 in 64-bit to be precise),
> doing a simple "sudo apt-get install lua" only seems to have installed
> a small 800KB'ish package, so I am guessing that this is barebones
> interpreter only. Any tips/pointers on how to get the LFW equivalent
> setup on Ubuntu ? Do I have to figure out the corresponding "rocks"
> and install those manually, one-by-one ? Isn't there a simpler way ?

If you want 'the kitchen sink' and you don't want to look them over
one-by-one, you could try something like,

apt-get install $(apt-cache search --names-only liblua5.1 | gawk '/(^i|-dbg
|-dev )/ {next} {print $1}')

... but I haven't actually tried it, so YMMV.

Cheers,
David

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Jayanth Acharya
In reply to this post by steve donovan
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:47 PM, steve donovan
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Jayanth Acharya <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> and install those manually, one-by-one ? Isn't there a simpler way ?
>
> Actually, there's a lot already in the Debian/Ubuntu repos, e.g. if
> you search for liblua5.1* you will get stuff like:
>
> ...
> i A liblua5.1-socket2              - TCP/UDP socket library for Lua 5.1
> p   liblua5.1-sql-doc              - luasql documentation
> p   liblua5.1-sql-mysql-2          - luasql library for the Lua language vers
> p   liblua5.1-sql-mysql-dev        - luasql development files for the Lua lan
> ...

Thanks.

Okay... but is there anything like a "golden package of rocks" /
"extensions" -- something that most developers use, i.e. most
developers use for the common purpose (e.g. parsing XML, templating,
bit-operations etc.). Going through the rocks catalog for instance, I
found that there are several of those, for same purpose, so how do I
pick & choose. Do I stick to the ones supplied by Ubuntu repos, or go
beyond, and if I do -- which ones ??

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Matthew Wild
On 3 March 2011 19:07, Jayanth Acharya <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:47 PM, steve donovan
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Jayanth Acharya <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> and install those manually, one-by-one ? Isn't there a simpler way ?
>>
>> Actually, there's a lot already in the Debian/Ubuntu repos, e.g. if
>> you search for liblua5.1* you will get stuff like:
>>
>> ...
>> i A liblua5.1-socket2              - TCP/UDP socket library for Lua 5.1
>> p   liblua5.1-sql-doc              - luasql documentation
>> p   liblua5.1-sql-mysql-2          - luasql library for the Lua language vers
>> p   liblua5.1-sql-mysql-dev        - luasql development files for the Lua lan
>> ...
>
> Thanks.
>
> Okay... but is there anything like a "golden package of rocks" /
> "extensions" -- something that most developers use, i.e. most
> developers use for the common purpose (e.g. parsing XML, templating,
> bit-operations etc.). Going through the rocks catalog for instance, I
> found that there are several of those, for same purpose, so how do I
> pick & choose. Do I stick to the ones supplied by Ubuntu repos, or go
> beyond, and if I do -- which ones ??
>

You're the developer, you get to choose - using whatever critera you want.

For any particular purpose, you can research the libraries available -
choose the one with the APIs or functionality that fits your project
best. Alternatively there are clear advantages by sticking with
whatever is already packaged for Debian/Ubuntu, as it saves a lot of
packaging headaches.

If you have a more concrete question about the differences between two
specific libraries, this list is probably a good source of knowledge.

Regards,
Matthew

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Enrico Tassi-3
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 07:18:54PM +0000, Matthew Wild wrote:
> On 3 March 2011 19:07, Jayanth Acharya <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:47 PM, steve donovan
> > Okay... but is there anything like a "golden package of rocks" /
> > "extensions" -- something that most developers use, i.e. most
> > developers use for the common purpose (e.g. parsing XML, templating,
> > bit-operations etc.). Going through the rocks catalog for instance, I
> > found that there are several of those, for same purpose, so how do I
> > pick & choose. Do I stick to the ones supplied by Ubuntu repos, or go
> > beyond, and if I do -- which ones ??

I tried not to put too many duplicates in the Debian archive, thus you
will not find many alternatives there. Of course you can use luarocks to
get any library that is not packaged.

The point of not having a meta-package depending a standard set of
libraries is that there is no such standard set, and this is IMO one of
the biggest problems of this technology (Lua I mean, not your linux
distribution).

Cheers
--
Enrico Tassi

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Josh Simmons
I think you mean biggest advantages.

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Enrico Tassi <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 07:18:54PM +0000, Matthew Wild wrote:
> On 3 March 2011 19:07, Jayanth Acharya <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:47 PM, steve donovan
> > Okay... but is there anything like a "golden package of rocks" /
> > "extensions" -- something that most developers use, i.e. most
> > developers use for the common purpose (e.g. parsing XML, templating,
> > bit-operations etc.). Going through the rocks catalog for instance, I
> > found that there are several of those, for same purpose, so how do I
> > pick & choose. Do I stick to the ones supplied by Ubuntu repos, or go
> > beyond, and if I do -- which ones ??

I tried not to put too many duplicates in the Debian archive, thus you
will not find many alternatives there. Of course you can use luarocks to
get any library that is not packaged.

The point of not having a meta-package depending a standard set of
libraries is that there is no such standard set, and this is IMO one of
the biggest problems of this technology (Lua I mean, not your linux
distribution).

Cheers
--
Enrico Tassi


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Jayanth Acharya
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 2:07 AM, joshua simmons <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I think you mean biggest advantages.

For a newbies especially, it is probably a 'glass is half empty'
effect -- a meta-package of good-rocks would really give a warm & cozy
feeling, especially so for people who need to switch between two
platforms (Win / Linux for instance). Flexibility is good, no doubt,
but it has it's costs.

> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Enrico Tassi <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 07:18:54PM +0000, Matthew Wild wrote:
>> > On 3 March 2011 19:07, Jayanth Acharya <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:47 PM, steve donovan
>> > > Okay... but is there anything like a "golden package of rocks" /
>> > > "extensions" -- something that most developers use, i.e. most
>> > > developers use for the common purpose (e.g. parsing XML, templating,
>> > > bit-operations etc.). Going through the rocks catalog for instance, I
>> > > found that there are several of those, for same purpose, so how do I
>> > > pick & choose. Do I stick to the ones supplied by Ubuntu repos, or go
>> > > beyond, and if I do -- which ones ??
>>
>> I tried not to put too many duplicates in the Debian archive, thus you
>> will not find many alternatives there. Of course you can use luarocks to
>> get any library that is not packaged.
>>
>> The point of not having a meta-package depending a standard set of
>> libraries is that there is no such standard set, and this is IMO one of
>> the biggest problems of this technology (Lua I mean, not your linux
>> distribution).
>>
>> Cheers
>> --
>> Enrico Tassi
>>
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Jayanth Acharya
In reply to this post by Enrico Tassi-3
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Enrico Tassi <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 07:18:54PM +0000, Matthew Wild wrote:
>> On 3 March 2011 19:07, Jayanth Acharya <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:47 PM, steve donovan
>> > Okay... but is there anything like a "golden package of rocks" /
>> > "extensions" -- something that most developers use, i.e. most
>> > developers use for the common purpose (e.g. parsing XML, templating,
>> > bit-operations etc.). Going through the rocks catalog for instance, I
>> > found that there are several of those, for same purpose, so how do I
>> > pick & choose. Do I stick to the ones supplied by Ubuntu repos, or go
>> > beyond, and if I do -- which ones ??
>
> I tried not to put too many duplicates in the Debian archive, thus you
> will not find many alternatives there. Of course you can use luarocks to
> get any library that is not packaged.

The set of packages available seem good for starts.

However, having gone through the rock catalog, identifying what-all I
might be interested in, here is a list that is not available on Ubuntu
as apt packages....
Alien, bit32, CGILua, ConcurrentLua, Lanes, config, HTK, lbase64,
lpack, tamales, tethys, xssfilter, Loop, lpc, lrandom, lposix,
lua-espeak, ReCaptcha, sputnik, sociallua, lua-imlib2, lua-spore...
amongst few others.

Is it because they are not so popular / commonly used, or because they
not well maintained and/or not very stable / depracated, or because
the set which is available already has the alternatives ?

> The point of not having a meta-package depending a standard set of
> libraries is that there is no such standard set, and this is IMO one of
> the biggest problems of this technology (Lua I mean, not your linux
> distribution).
>


cheers,
Jay

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Chris Babcock
In reply to this post by Enrico Tassi-3
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Enrico Tassi <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The point of not having a meta-package depending a standard set of
> libraries is that there is no such standard set, and this is IMO one of
> the biggest problems of this technology (Lua I mean, not your linux
> distribution).

A more politic way to say this might be that Lua offers no pretensions
to a standard toolkit because neither the language nor the community
makes any assumption about the jobs for which you'll be using it.

It's generally not safe to assume that Lua will be running in a
general purpose environment where a full stack approach would be
useful or that having a full stack implementation available is
completely without a downside. The negative consequences of the
meta-package approach range in embedded applications is time lost
debugging code that "works just fine in the tests" on a work station.
The security implications of having luasocket accidentally available
in an extension environment include, "Oh, CRAP! One of my players used
my mail server to send half a million Viagra adverts before I could
shut down his account. Also, if new Lua users come to think of the
tools in the full stack tool kit as standard equipment for Lua, that
makes Lua less attractive as an extension or embedding language.
"Batteries included" is great marketing, but it's not practical for
two of the major use cases for Lua.

Also, it's not as simple as identifying a leading library for each
tool in the hypothetical toolbox. Unless the best tool for the job is
completely unencumbered, it's not going to be the best tool for
everyone. So, if you thought the "anointing" issue was hard, let's
open up THAT can of worms. ;)

Chris
--
Yippee-ki-yay, coffee maker.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Yuri Takhteyev
In reply to this post by Jayanth Acharya
> Alien, bit32, CGILua, ConcurrentLua, Lanes, config, HTK, lbase64,
> lpack, tamales, tethys, xssfilter, Loop, lpc, lrandom, lposix,
> lua-espeak, ReCaptcha, sputnik, sociallua, lua-imlib2, lua-spore...
> amongst few others.
>
> Is it because they are not so popular / commonly used, or because they
> not well maintained and/or not very stable / depracated, or because
> the set which is available already has the alternatives ?

Speaking just for my own modules, I would say that in two cases
(xssfilter, recaptcha) for me as the developer it's the fact that they
can be easily installed either by hand or via LuaRocks, while in the
third (sputnik), it is also a matter of wanting to make sure that
people install the latest version. (In fact, I usually try to convince
people to get the version out of git.) Oh, and of course the lack of
time.

   - yuri

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

steve donovan
In reply to this post by Matthew Wild
On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 9:18 PM, Matthew Wild <[hidden email]> wrote:
> best. Alternatively there are clear advantages by sticking with
> whatever is already packaged for Debian/Ubuntu, as it saves a lot of
> packaging headaches.

Two ideal situations:
(1) Hisham's vision

$ sudo apt-get install luarocks
$ sudo luarocks install batteries

(such a rock does not exist yet of course - we would have to decide
what goes into a 'minimal' set of batteries)

(2) Somebody makes a .deb which depends on the desired packages.

(or even a script that feeds into apt-get)

Best of both worlds would be if luarocks could provide per-platform
alternatives, so if you ask for luasocket you get the native package,
etc. That would take some thinking because it's necessarily different
for the common package managers (apt,yum,macports, etc) and is
something to think about for future luarocks directions.

What are the 'desired packages'? I think that's what currently being
debated. A minimal core would include luafilesystem, luasocket,
luaexpat (for XML), lpeg, Alien, ....  After that it gets fuzzy. For
instance, luaposix is a must for Unix, LuaCOM is a must for Windows.
Lua-Gnome is available on Ubuntu, but that's not everyone's cup of
tea.

steve d.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Chris Babcock
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:00 AM, steve donovan
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> What are the 'desired packages'? I think that's what currently being
> debated. A minimal core would include luafilesystem, luasocket,
> luaexpat (for XML), lpeg, Alien, ....  After that it gets fuzzy. For
> instance, luaposix is a must for Unix, LuaCOM is a must for Windows.

Shopping list:
http://docs.python.org/library/

Call them "extras"... or anything else to differentiate it from the
Lua "standard" library. When people go from their workstation
environment to an embedded application in their router or an extension
language in a game, it should be perfectly clear that extras are
extra.

There's room for OS-specific packages as well network protocols, data
structures, persistence tools, math, console and command line libs,
cryptography, IPC... and GUI bindings - nothing on the order of
Lua-Gnome or lqt - maybe ltk.

Also enough library code in Lua is MIT/X license that it could be a
requirement. The consistency would be marvelous.

Call the package LuaKS for no explicit reason. ;)

Chris
--
Yippee-ki-yay, coffee maker.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

steve donovan
In reply to this post by steve donovan
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 9:00 AM, steve donovan <[hidden email]> wrote:
> (or even a script that feeds into apt-get)

Thanks to my old friend awk, and a little editorial discretion:

# lua-install
apt-get install liblua5.1-bitop0 \
liblua5.1-copas-dev \
liblua5.1-copas0 \
liblua5.1-cosmo0 \
liblua5.1-dev \
liblua5.1-doc0 \
liblua5.1-expat-dev \
liblua5.1-expat0 \
liblua5.1-filesystem-dev \
liblua5.1-filesystem0 \
liblua5.1-iconv0 \
liblua5.1-json \
liblua5.1-logging \
liblua5.1-logging-dev \
liblua5.1-lpeg-dev \
liblua5.1-lpeg2 \
liblua5.1-markdown0 \
liblua5.1-md5-0 \
liblua5.1-md5-dev \
liblua5.1-posix-dev \
liblua5.1-posix1 \
liblua5.1-sec-dev \
liblua5.1-sec1 \
liblua5.1-socket-dev \
liblua5.1-socket2 \
liblua5.1-sql-doc \
liblua5.1-sql-sqlite2 \
liblua5.1-sql-sqlite3-2 \
liblua5.1-sql-sqlite3-dev \
liblua5.1-xmlrpc0 \
liblua5.1-zip-dev \
liblua5.1-zip0 \
luarocks
####

And I did test it - generally a good idea to grab everything at once,
because of the slow prepare/finish for individual installs. It's only
about 800Kb of downloads. (The -dev packages contain the
documentation.)

steve d.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Enrico Tassi-3
In reply to this post by Chris Babcock
On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 09:28:29PM -0700, Chris Babcock wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Enrico Tassi <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > The point of not having a meta-package depending a standard set of
> > libraries is that there is no such standard set, and this is IMO one of
> > the biggest problems of this technology (Lua I mean, not your linux
> > distribution).
>
> A more politic way to say this might be that Lua offers no pretensions
> to a standard toolkit because neither the language nor the community
> makes any assumption about the jobs for which you'll be using it.

Well, it depends on your definition job. I hadn't in mind "download
something from the net", I had in mind "downloading something with libcURL".
Do you think developers like to have 3 different bindings for the same
lib? The same holds for SQL DBMS interfaces. Also GTK seems to have 2,
maybe 3, different bindings. We now have 3 bit libs (with 2 APIs).

And with a set of libs, I mean a set of libs that are well tested and
that, for example, the community or the authors will keep up to date.
Not necessarily a set of librarier that must be installed by default, or
all together.

> "Batteries included" is great marketing, but it's not practical for
> two of the major use cases for Lua.

Agreed, but my perspective was a bit different as I explained.

Cheers
--
Enrico Tassi

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Enrico Tassi-3
In reply to this post by Jayanth Acharya
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 09:37:39AM +0530, Jayanth Acharya wrote:

> > I tried not to put too many duplicates in the Debian archive, thus you
> > will not find many alternatives there. Of course you can use luarocks to
> > get any library that is not packaged.
>
> The set of packages available seem good for starts.
>
> However, having gone through the rock catalog, identifying what-all I
> might be interested in, here is a list that is not available on Ubuntu
> as apt packages....
> Alien, bit32, CGILua, ConcurrentLua, Lanes, config, HTK, lbase64,
> lpack, tamales, tethys, xssfilter, Loop, lpc, lrandom, lposix,
> lua-espeak, ReCaptcha, sputnik, sociallua, lua-imlib2, lua-spore...
> amongst few others.

False, as Debian packages you have: posix, sputnik, CGILua, bitop, and
you can find base64 encoding in luasocket. And as suggested, you can
install luarocks and then fetch all you need with it.

Did you enabled the universe repository?

> Is it because they are not so popular / commonly used, or because they
> not well maintained and/or not very stable / depracated, or because
> the set which is available already has the alternatives ?

It's because someone has to maintain these packages. Making a new
package is easy, but maintaing it takes time. And since I'm the one
maintaining them in my free time...

So I've essentially packaged the dependencies of sputnik, prosody and
freepops plus some other nice libs like lpeg, lua-gtk and some essentials
for unix systems like lposix.

Cheers
--
Enrico Tassi

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Pierre Chapuis
In reply to this post by Jayanth Acharya
 On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 00:37:39 +0530, Jayanth Acharya wrote:

> Okay... but is there anything like a "golden package of rocks" /
> "extensions" -- something that most developers use, i.e. most
> developers use for the common purpose (e.g. parsing XML, templating,
> bit-operations etc.). Going through the rocks catalog for instance, I
> found that there are several of those, for same purpose, so how do I
> pick & choose. Do I stick to the ones supplied by Ubuntu repos, or go
> beyond, and if I do -- which ones ??

 Would you like something like http://ruby-toolbox.com/? I use it when
 I have to search for a Ruby Gem, and sometimes miss it for Lua. It
 makes
 it trivial to find choices and pick those you should evaluate.

 Is there something like this in the Lua community? The wiki comes close
 but the interface is not as easy to use.

--
 Pierre 'catwell' Chapuis

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

Jayanth Acharya
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Pierre Chapuis <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Fri, 4 Mar 2011 00:37:39 +0530, Jayanth Acharya wrote:
>
>> Okay... but is there anything like a "golden package of rocks" /
>> "extensions" -- something that most developers use, i.e. most
>> developers use for the common purpose (e.g. parsing XML, templating,
>> bit-operations etc.). Going through the rocks catalog for instance, I
>> found that there are several of those, for same purpose, so how do I
>> pick & choose. Do I stick to the ones supplied by Ubuntu repos, or go
>> beyond, and if I do -- which ones ??
>
> Would you like something like http://ruby-toolbox.com/? I use it when
> I have to search for a Ruby Gem, and sometimes miss it for Lua. It makes
> it trivial to find choices and pick those you should evaluate.
>
> Is there something like this in the Lua community? The wiki comes close
> but the interface is not as easy to use.
>

ruby-toolbox.com seems very interesting as a concept. in fact this
concept is used in many other areas of software s.a. preconfiguring
build image, and downloading the customized build image. makes the
task of config flag twiddling a non-issue, which is generally
considered to be a rather high entry-barrier for newbies. ruby-toolbox
has a social-network tinge to it (popularity, community recommendation
etc. -- which is very helpful).

my main desire for 'batteries' is not so much for it's load-and-fire
use, but rather the convenience of not having to look/try/compare
modules/packages especially where there are more than one performing a
task and be able to bank on someone more experienced (and possibly
smarter) than me, to have done that for me, s.t. i could get
productive sooner.

for instance, i am not sure what to go with, when it comes to --
 OOP with Lua
 base64 encoding
 Concurrancy
 HTTP client library

that is just a representative set. at the moment, i am just around
48hours into Lua, so some obvious things look challenging as well.

thanks,
Jay

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Can Lua replace awk?

Dirk Laurie
In reply to this post by steve donovan
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 10:14:28AM +0200, steve donovan wrote:
>
> Thanks to my old friend awk, and a little editorial discretion:
>
I wondered why your new friend lua could not also do it.

E.g. to make a list of packages whose names start with liblua5.1
you can paste the following into a bash shell:

aptitude search liblua5.1 |
 lua -e "print(table.concat((
 function () t={};
 for i in io.lines() do
 table.insert(t,string.match(i,'liblua%S*'))
 end return t end)(),' '))"

Dirk


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: any easy 'batteries-included' way of installing Lua on linux (ubuntu to be specific)

David Manura
In reply to this post by Jayanth Acharya
On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 6:36 AM, Jayanth Acharya <[hidden email]> wrote:

> ruby-toolbox.com seems very interesting as a concept.[...]
> my main desire for 'batteries' is not so much for it's load-and-fire
> use, but rather the convenience of not having to look/try/compare
> modules/packages especially where there are more than one performing a
> task and be able to bank on someone more experienced (and possibly
> smarter) than me, to have done that for me, s.t. i could get
> productive sooner.
>
> for instance, i am not sure what to go with, when it comes to --
>  OOP with Lua
>  base64 encoding
>  Concurrancy
>  HTTP client library

Those things are covered by the LuaForge2 and Lua Cookbook efforts
(which don't really exist yet).  They are also covered by the wiki
(which exists today):

  http://lua-users.org/wiki/ObjectOrientedProgramming
  http://lua-users.org/wiki/BaseSixtyFour
  http://lua-users.org/wiki/MultiTasking
  http://lua-users.org/wiki/LibrariesAndBindings under "Networking
Generic / Low-level"

except that the wiki content could be improved.  Improving it requires
people who will study the various alternatives in detail and to write
about them, kind-of like these:

  http://kotisivu.dnainternet.net/askok/bin/lanes/comparison.html
  http://gamesfromwithin.com/the-quest-for-the-perfect-build-system-part-2

One thing about ruby-toolbox.com (or LuaForge2) is that there is some
emphasis on automatic metrics like # downloads or # github watchers
over prose (as on the wiki).

12