Best Lua integration?

Jesse Phillips via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Thu Nov 17 10:26:54 PST 2016


On Thursday, 17 November 2016 at 06:33:06 UTC, Kim wrote:
> Yes I see the higher level as a weakness. It may save you time 
> to integrate in D, but tries to hide complexity. Hiding 
> complexity can hurt in other ways.
>
> I think I will go for the more C-like binding of DerelictLua; I 
> am fine for the shared libraries binding as I don't need static 
> bindings, but I guess that could be added without too much 
> effort?

For your desires Derelict sounds like the best option. I 
definitely recommend LuaD though. I'm not sure what complexity 
your concerned about hiding, you're trying to interface with a 
dynamic language, LuaD provides "high level" functions which 
handle adding and removing D/Lua objects from the Lua stack and 
interacting with Lua objects directly. You should still be able 
to manipulate Lua through the C API, I just don't know why you'd 
want to put yourself through that.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list