Best Lua integration?

[Chris via Digitalmars-d]

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?

I've worked with both. I prefer DerelictLua, because you have 
more direct control. But be prepared to deal with Lua stacks and 
its C API, which can be a bit annoying at times. You'll probably 
start writing you own D wrappers for convenience (that's where 
D's templates shine) and end up with something like LuaD - which 
makes you appreciate LuaD even more.