Moonscript, a better LUA?

Moonscript, a better LUA?

Postby Julius » 13 Aug 2011, 14:16

http://moonscript.org/

Happend to come across this... maybe of interest for some of you.
User avatar
Julius
Community Moderator
 
Posts: 3297
Joined: 06 Dec 2009, 14:02

Re: Moonscript, a better LUA?

Postby andrewj » 16 Aug 2011, 13:33

Not my cup of tea (I've never been a fan of significant whitespace).

What I did find interesting is that he considers all the Lua keywords as "line noise" -- I've heard the exact same thing from Lua proponents about C/C++ (operators like "&&" instead of "and" and so forth). Seems one person's beautiful code is another person's line noise.
User avatar
andrewj
 
Posts: 194
Joined: 15 Dec 2009, 16:32
Location: Tasmania

Re: Moonscript, a better LUA?

Postby Sauer2 » 26 Aug 2011, 15:36

So it's the CoffeeScript counterpart of Lua?
I find language-to-language compilers to be a interesting approach, but wouldn't it be better to use a target language, which is old and isn't still under heavy development, for example C or maybe Ada?
Also think about the additional dependencies.

BTW: Is it just me or is the font of the page in firefox on Windows 7 somewhat ugly?
User avatar
Sauer2
 
Posts: 430
Joined: 19 Jan 2010, 14:02

Re: Moonscript, a better LUA?

Postby Tranberry » 28 Aug 2011, 15:01

Sauer2: It is ugly in chrome too.
I agree with Q until I post differently.
User avatar
Tranberry
Community Moderator
 
Posts: 140
Joined: 08 Dec 2009, 21:46
Location: Hjo, Sweden

Re: Moonscript, a better LUA?

Postby Sauer2 » 28 Aug 2011, 16:24

That's interesting. Also the fact that the IE9 rendering is more smooth but without the shadows. I guess you can choose between ugly and ugly, then.
User avatar
Sauer2
 
Posts: 430
Joined: 19 Jan 2010, 14:02

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest