Re: requiring modules with a C and Lua part

[Glenn Maynard <glenn@...>]

On Wed, Nov 01, 2006 at 07:30:42PM -0200, Reuben Thomas wrote:
> I'd rather not embed the Lua code: it makes development and inspection 
> harder. It's a pity to obfuscate what you don't have to.

It does the opposite, too, though: it introduces new error cases (or
makes existing ones more likely), like mismatched binaries and code,
and having to locate code on disk.  If the Lua code is embedded in
the binary, then a lot of that goes away--things can still be built
incorrectly, but installation errors are reduced.

(For development, it's good to have both available.  I don't want
to rebuild a binary to change Lua code.)

-- 
Glenn Maynard