[C++-sig] Re: Interest in luabind

[Daniel Wallin]

At 19:33 2003-07-03, you wrote:
>Rene Rivera <grafik666 at redshift-software.com> writes:
>
> > [2003-07-01] Daniel Wallin wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>I don't know. I'm sure more issues will pop up later on though. :)
> >>How do we proceed from here?
>
> > After that finding out what I and others can help with; deciding
> > where to put the work; what to name / where to put the common code;
> > do we want to move the dev discussion to a dedicated list; etc.
> >
> > Some possible answers to those:
> >
> > Question is do we do all the dev work there or do we keep the
> > LuaBind part where it is? I can contact Jeremy about adding Daniel
> > and Arvid to it, so that Dave can continue enjoying his vacation ;-)
>
>I think it's best to have everything in one repository so we can be
>aggressive about sharing architecture and technology.

I agree.


> > As for the name of the common code, I think there was one previous
> > suggestion which I can't remember. But my suggestion is
> > Boost.Tie. It's on par with Boost.Bind, but tie is one of the terms
> > used for binding at runtime/dynamically. I would assume Boost.Lua
> > would be the conterpart to Boost.Python.
>
>Tie already has a meaning in the tuples library.  I think we ought to
>consider something that has more connotations of _dynamic_ _language_
>binding.  It's a bit unfortunate because we probably don't like some
>of the connotations, but "Boost.Script" might be the most apporpriate
>name.

Script it better.. It doesn't feel good though, but it might just take
some time to get used to. :)


Daniel Wallin, dalwan01 at student.umu.se