[PD] *.lua => *.pd_lua or *.l_lua?

[Frank Barknecht]

Hallo,
Hans-Christoph Steiner hat gesagt: // Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:

> I think that we'd probably be better off not adding any more arcane  
> file extensions.  

Lua scripts don't have a required file extension, the .lua is just a
convention in the lua world, but as an embedded language, you will
fine lua scripts with all kinds of other extensions. *.lua however is
kind of required when you import modules using "require", but as pdlua
scripts aren't modules, we'd better avoid to use it as well.

> An easy way to avoid this is to have pdlua look for a setup function  
> in the .lua it is trying to open.  If there is no setup function,  
> then it wouldn't load that file.  That's really the key technique for  
> loading pd binaries.  The differing file extensions aren't really  
> necessary.

I don't know much about it, but aren't loaders in Pd registered for
file endings? I guess it may slow down things a lot if python,
rt-scheme, Q, lua or whatever loader would first need to inspect all
files to find out that most aren't loadable.

Ciao
-- 
 Frank Barknecht                                     _ ______footils.org__