Re: Bitlib for l4w?

["Andrew Wilson" <agrwagrw@...>]

Yes indeed the Python interface[1] would be a great addition to LfW.   AGRW

On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 7:40 PM, David Manura <dm.lua@math2.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:39 AM, Andrew Wilson wrote:
>> If a binary library module already exists it can generally just be
>> added to the Lua for Windows package. If only source exists and we've
>> got to compile the library module we've been hesitant to do this
>> because it implies ownership of binary which implies maintenance of
>> said library etc etc. So if you've got a binary module you want
>> included in L4W, that makes it much easier/quicker to add in L4W
>> package.
>
> I think the better approach in the long term (not to say that both
> approaches can't be used in parallel) is to maintain some script that
> would allow anyone to quickly build all of the LfW modules from source
> in one shot, such as by using the LuaRocks build system as a backend
> and adding rockspecs for those modules that currently don't have one.
> That assumes a certain maturity in LuaRocks Windows support.  I
> started checking on that some months ago but got diverted to other
> things.
>
> BTW, I think the Python interface[1] could be a great addition to LfW
> (you gain all the Python libraries by installing a Windows Python
> distribution).
>
> [1] http://lua-users.org/wiki/LunaticPython
>