Re: LuaJIT FFI vs Lua binding vs Lua interface

[Miles Bader <miles@...>]

Francesco Abbate <francesco.bbt@gmail.com> writes:
> In my point of view the FFI interface is so much interesting that it
> would be a benefit for Lua, as a programming language, to adopt it as
> a standard library.

The FFI interface is not a good fit for ordinary Lua, because it's too
dynamic (too much stuff happens at runtime), and as a result, too slow.
In LuaJIT, this isn't an issue because LuaJIT can compile everything at
runtime, but Lua can't do that.

> A pure Lua FFI implementation already exists

"LuaFFI" is not pure Lua, and is not portable (it has CPU-dependent
parts).  That makes it a poor choice (in addition to the problems I
mentioned above) for anybody desiring the good portability of Lua.

-Miles

-- 
The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.
  --Albert Einstein