On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:38:57PM +0100, João Valverde wrote:
>
>
> On 08/19/2016 04:05 PM, João Valverde wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 08/19/2016 03:56 PM, João Valverde wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 08/19/2016 02:54 PM, Peter Wu wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 09:17:35PM +0100, João Valverde
On 08/20/2016 01:18 PM, Peter Wu wrote:
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:38:57PM +0100, João Valverde wrote:
On 08/19/2016 04:05 PM, João Valverde wrote:
On 08/19/2016 03:56 PM, João Valverde wrote:
On 08/19/2016 02:54 PM, Peter Wu wrote:
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 09:17:35PM +0100, João Valve
On 08/20/2016 02:03 PM, João Valverde wrote:
On 08/20/2016 01:18 PM, Peter Wu wrote:
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:38:57PM +0100, João Valverde wrote:
On 08/19/2016 04:05 PM, João Valverde wrote:
On 08/19/2016 03:56 PM, João Valverde wrote:
On 08/19/2016 02:54 PM, Peter Wu wrote:
On M
On 08/20/2016 02:06 PM, João Valverde wrote:
On 08/20/2016 02:03 PM, João Valverde wrote:
On 08/20/2016 01:18 PM, Peter Wu wrote:
On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 05:38:57PM +0100, João Valverde wrote:
On 08/19/2016 04:05 PM, João Valverde wrote:
On 08/19/2016 03:56 PM, João Valverde wrote:
If 5.3 compatibility is added it should be no problem. After looking at
the actual changes (https://www.lua.org/manual/5.3/readme.html#changes
and also the linked incompatibilities), I see the following changes to
the Lua code:
- 64-bit integer support. Nice!
A bit more than nice. I'm seeing