| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
atom0s
Moderator
 Reputation: 198
Joined: 25 Jan 2006
Posts: 8517
Location: 127.0.0.1
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2015 4:18 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Lack of interest or motivation probably. Python is also slow and not really meant to be embedded.
_________________
- Retired. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
panraven
Grandmaster Cheater
![]() Reputation: 55
Joined: 01 Oct 2008
Posts: 942
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2015 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
May I ask : but why no luajit ?
ie. any technical reasons behind choosing 5.3 than luajit for ce. I think luajit's native support of ffi (so ce will have native support of ffi) is more beneficial for ce's propose... or I misunderstood something.
_________________
- Retarded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atom0s
Moderator
Reputation: 198
Joined: 25 Jan 2006
Posts: 8517
Location: 127.0.0.1
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2015 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| panraven wrote: | May I ask : but why no luajit ?
ie. any technical reasons behind choosing 5.3 than luajit for ce. I think luajit's native support of ffi (so ce will have native support of ffi) is more beneficial for ce's propose... or I misunderstood something. |
That would be more for DB to answer since CE is his creation. Perhaps he tried and had issues with it or similar. Personally I don't touch Lua 5.2/5.3 since it lacks a community behind it that 5.1 had. 5.1 has so many great patches, custom libs, etc. made for it there is almost no reason to upgrade.
That said, LuaJit ran on 5.1 and then the creator of it moved on when 5.2/5.3 came about. He was posting about finding new maintainers last I saw.
_________________
- Retired. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
panraven
Grandmaster Cheater
![]() Reputation: 55
Joined: 01 Oct 2008
Posts: 942
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2015 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ah, i see. Thank you~
btw, on testing integer behavior, it seems LuaJIT (v2.1.0 alpha) 'normal integer' has only 52-53 bit precision. It need the 'LL' suffix for 64bit precision.
However, it then is a LuaJIT cdata that something like t[1LL]~=t[1LL] 'abnormality' cf. t[{}]~=t[{}] happened (from some mailing list and verify on above jit version). May be this one reason ~_~
| Code: | -- LuaJIT code
local a = 1LL
local b = 1LL
local t = {}
t[a],t[b]=1,2
print(t[a],t[b],t[a]==t[b])
--print: 1 2 false |
But ce has full 64 bit precision since ce 6.2~
_________________
- Retarded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dark Byte
Site Admin
 Reputation: 458
Joined: 09 May 2003
Posts: 25295
Location: The netherlands
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2015 2:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
5.1 didn't support 64 bit integers so i used a lnum patch to add it. But that added a couple of weird math errors. (adding a value from an interpreted string would sometimes not add the value)
5.3 has proper support for 64 bit values
http://cheatengine.org/mantis/view.php?id=328
_________________
Do not ask me about online cheats. I don't know any and wont help finding them.
Like my help? Join me on Patreon so i can keep helping |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atom0s
Moderator
Reputation: 198
Joined: 25 Jan 2006
Posts: 8517
Location: 127.0.0.1
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 26, 2015 2:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| panraven wrote: | ah, i see. Thank you~
btw, on testing integer behavior, it seems LuaJIT (v2.1.0 alpha) 'normal integer' has only 52-53 bit precision. It need the 'LL' suffix for 64bit precision.
However, it then is a LuaJIT cdata that something like t[1LL]~=t[1LL] 'abnormality' cf. t[{}]~=t[{}] happened (from some mailing list and verify on above jit version). May be this one reason ~_~
| Code: | -- LuaJIT code
local a = 1LL
local b = 1LL
local t = {}
t[a],t[b]=1,2
print(t[a],t[b],t[a]==t[b])
--print: 1 2 false |
But ce has full 64 bit precision since ce 6.2~ |
LuaJit runs on top of Lua 5.1 which as DB mentioned above, does not support 64bit integers. Even the newest version of LuaJit still runs on the older 5.1 code base.
_________________
- Retired. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
