Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

There needs to be a features matrix for each backend #65

Open
atilde opened this issue Feb 28, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

There needs to be a features matrix for each backend #65

atilde opened this issue Feb 28, 2022 · 3 comments

Comments

@atilde
Copy link

atilde commented Feb 28, 2022

Not all features are supported on all backends. Most notably, I've seen Lua omitted in several places. There needs to be a features matrix that users can refer to to see what stdlib features are available to each backend.

@eduardoejp
Copy link
Member

It depends on what you mean by "feature".

All fundamental features of Lux are supported by all back-ends.

If that weren't the case, the back-end wouldn't exist since it couldn't support the standard library, which is were Lux is truly embodied (more-so than the compilers themselves).

With that said, there are some differences:
Example #1: Lux/JVM features multi-core concurrency, since the JVM provides it. But the scripting languages don't.
Example #2: Some forms of IO cannot be provided by the Lux stdlib for Lua because Lua has no standard way of providing them, unlike the other platforms.

These things are not fundamental to Lux, but they are notable differences.

So, sure.
I guess I can review what divergences there are and make a little table so people don't become confused when they see something missing for one of the back-ends.

@jgarvin
Copy link

jgarvin commented Aug 20, 2022

Users who aren't totally familiar with each platform might not realize that Lux isn't going to implement a low latency parallel compacting GC for them ;)

I'd maybe suggest:
Red -- Not supported because platform can't
Yellow -- Not supported because Lux hasn't implemented support
Green -- Supported

@eduardoejp
Copy link
Member

@jgarvin
Thank you for the color coding suggestion. It's fantastic.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants