kiwi VS moonscript

Nucleic also makes Kiwi one of the fastest Cassowary Constraint implementations. It is very useful for implementing custom GUIs as it can make building internal component layouts and general layout systems fairly straightforward and it’s very performant.

I highly encourage taking a look at it and it has also been ported to a wide range of language.

I’m using Nim kiwi with my own GUI library now. I’ll have to take a peak at how enaml is using kiwi for its layouts.

https://kiwisolver.readthedocs.io/en/latest/

https://github.com/alexbirkett/kiwi-java

https://github.com/PongoEngine/jasper

https://github.com/yglukhov/kiwi

If any of the Luau devs are watching this, please flesh out the metamethods. I'd switch almost everything to Luau if they were improved.

They're the biggest PITA right now as designed in PUC-Rio, and I see that while you've improved upon __eq, other metamethods are still lacking.

In PUC-Rio, boolean equality operators FORCE a boolean result, regardless of what you return. Ideally they would allow returning any result type, which then can be coerced to boolean later (e.g. by an `if` statement), just like the arithmetic operators do.

Further, `__neq`, `__ge` and `__gt` do not exist. They should.

The lack of a proper metamethod design means that binding to e.g. Kiwi[0] is impossible without some incredibly fugly hacks. It has been a long-standing annoyance with Lua in an otherwise beautiful little scripting language (that I use frequently).

This looks quite nice - lots of attempts in this space but nothing that attempts to match Lua to this degree.

[0] https://github.com/nucleic/kiwi

Now I like lua, and think single pass is the way to go for interpreted, since you don't have the disadvantage of a slow compile time no matter how big your codebase gets, BUT its not great to write in. things like +=, ++, are not possible, which means the only solution is to transpile into it, which has led to some good languages like moonscript[0], teal[1] which offers static type checking, an absolute must as your codebase grows.

[0]: https://moonscript.org/

That can be very productive and clever, but be - and stay - aware that such polyglot solutions tend to be maintenance headaches in the longer run.

There is a really nice open source project out there that allows you to train your hearing and your sightreading, but it's written in the authors own language which in turn compiles to JavaScript and the headache to set up their toolchain is such that I haven't bothered fixing any of the bugs that I'm aware of (and there are plenty).

https://sightreading.training/

https://github.com/leafo/sightreading.training

It's written in a language called 'Moonscript':

https://github.com/leafo/moonscript

Which compiles to Lua. Which compiles to JS.

Madness. Nice madness, but still, it stopped me from being a contributor.

RE: the cost of switching at this point, what about languages that compile to Lua? Like https://moonscript.org/. That would let you keep the legacy code, no?

In the case of Lapis, it is actually written in Moonscript, which needs a few more things.

There's also some languages made to compile straight to Lua: - MoonScript is the most popular Lua wrapper - it's built to be more Python-like, featuring indentation-based scopes, function calls without parentheses, lambda syntax, list comprehension, and much more. - Yuescript is a modern update to MoonScript that adds more features (I haven't used it myself, so I'm not entirely sure exactly how it differs from MS). - Teal is a version of Lua that adds static typing for better code standards.

A programmer-friendly language that compiles to Lua.

This is a sample code for learning, written in Moonscript for TIC-80: