Re: 5.2 and 5.1

[Rob Kendrick <rjek@...>]

On Mon, Apr 08, 2013 at 11:46:18PM +0100, Matthew Wild wrote:
> No, you evidently have an incorrect perspective - Lua 5.1 has been
> around some time. Lua 5.2 is quite young :)
> 
> There's nothing inherently wrong with 5.1, and there's nothing
> amazingly attractive about 5.2. I expect the majority of people will
> continue with the version they are on for some time, there are people
> still using Lua 4.0 and earlier just fine.

I dare not touch it:
+++ Talker Name:            Meta Hills
+++ Version:                1.46 (14 Feb 2011) (c) Rob Kendrick (Lua 4.0)
+++ Compiled:               Mon Feb 14 11:00:18 GMT 2011 (Linux i686)
+++ Started:                Tue Jul 05 09:03:40 BST 2011
+++ Up for:                 1 year, 39 weeks, 6 days, 23 hours, 34 minutes, 55 seconds.

I've no immediate plans to move to Lua 5.2; I still maintain Lua 4.0
software, almost all my own current developments are done for 5.1.
However, I do make an effort for any extensions I write to be compatible
with 5.2 too: you never know.

For the moment, the attraction of more expressive metatables does not
overcome my function environment anxiety.

B.