this patch is for selecting lua interpreter such as luajit, lua51
and in addition, little more changes to unify lua dependency over efl
Mhmmmm i don't know if it is so good to leak the name of the depency into a option, on arch for example i don't even have lua51 arround, is it *really* only lua5.1 support, or is it also working with lua5.2 ?
IMO, what you said is not the kind of a problem. because the things that we are doing on meson.build are the kind of dependencies.
we don't say that it's a problem to leak a name of window systems such as 'wayland', 'x', don't we?
also luajit has a compatibility on both ABI/API level for lua5.1.
that is the reason why I thought that this kind of configuration could be adapted.
Also, it's not true that 5.1 is API/ABI compatible with luajit; it only applies the other way around, i.e. luajit is a superset of 5.1 functionality. While elua itself might compile with 5.1 (because it doesn't really use any C API calls beyond what 5.1 provides), it will be effectively useless because all the elua scripts rely on runtime luajit functionality (primarily the FFI)
@akanad The problem i see here is: when we update the dependency (like @q66 proposed above), a whole config option will be dropped and a new one will be added. Which is nothing that i want to have in the build options. The difference to the display protocol here is, the version of the wayland package or x11 package does not leak through.
A option where you can choose between lua or luajit is fine. The problem is the lua51 vs. lua52 vs. lua53.
(Additionally, can you rename the variable to lua, having a variable luajit that is a dependency object from the dependency lua, is a bit weird :))
I remembered that I saw something like 'lua51' while using autogen.sh.
and I just found it on m4/efl_lua_old.m4. (regarding to --enable-lua-old)
how do you think about the kind of a patch to provide a lua-interpreter option as 'lua-old' and 'luajit'
if user select 'lua-old' as a interpreter then check lua dep from system package manager by names like a way it does on m4/efl_lua_old.m4
(of course, lua-old should be used, except elua)
I think that we don't have to think the proposal unless it exist. once it comes, then we can remove the thing that I am saying.
Concept looks good and perfetly fine, just those little nitpicks :)
this should also check what happens if luajit is really the option value
Noep, only luajit is broken...