Lua vs Java?

[OttoRobba]

There is no harm in learning as much as possible.That said, I myself am unlikely to learn java in depth because I dislike it and I have no need for it at work. I use Lua ostensibly though, since our games are currently made with Corona. (I would rather use love though)

Programming languages are simply tools - the more tools you have, the easier it will be to look at different solutions for problems. Just go with the grain - don't try to shoehorn what you use into a paradigm that does not fit it.

For sheer employability C and C++ are great languages to know. But you are even more employable if you have actual projects made. What made me employable was a gamedev blog + personal games + a simple JavaScript game engine. Projects > languages, always.

Personally I like Processing or Lua as first languages.

An aside: I have seen people that knew C++, Java and Assembly lake hideous code - in short, the languages that you know mean very little.

[kbmonkey]

An aside: I have seen people that knew C++, Java and Assembly lake hideous code - in short, the languages that you know mean very little.

So very true! And on that note, that reminds me of this fun language comparison grid: http://www.rubyinside.com/holiday-fun-h ... -2911.html

[NickRock]

If you want to get a job as a software developer go with Java
If you're just a hobbyist programmer who wants to make games go with Lua (Love2D)

But you can also learn both!

[Murii]

If you want to get a job as a software developer go with Java
If you're just a hobbyist programmer who wants to make games go with Lua (Love2D)

But you can also learn both!

+1

[SiENcE]

Speaking about Java as a language is only 1% of the real scope. Java is more a galaxy of different frameworks and foundations. It's so huge when you dig deeper into the different worlds of application servers (jboss,websphere, aso.) and frameworks like spring, vaadin,...
Java is good for large projects, where a lot of developers work togehter.

Lua is, good to embed, small and has a lot of libraries. But there is no control about the language or the libraries. There is no real maintainance, no correct versioning, no distribution system. It's more use and throw away.
But i love it for prototyping!


Java is hard work.
Lua is fun!

[OttoRobba]

I'd like to reiterate that programming languages are just tools and that one should use the best for the job (including ecosystem, familiarity, features, et al...).

Lua is [...] more use and throw away.

I couldn't disagree more. We have a growing codebase of tools and components, developed over the past 5 years, all based on Lua. It is, by no means, "use and throw away". You can easily version libs with semver - perhaps it is not as strict as something like Elm but it works.

Java is hard work.
Lua is fun!

Sorry but this is disingenious. As fun as Lua is, this quote leads one to believe that Lua cannot be used for real work. I could not disagree more! We have over 125 games shipped, all of them made, you guessed it, in Lua.
If that is not fit for hard work, then I don't know what is.

I'll leave this article here I guess.

[SiENcE]

I'd like to reiterate that programming languages are just tools and that one should use the best for the job (including ecosystem, familiarity, features, et al...).

Lua is [...] more use and throw away.

I couldn't disagree more. We have a growing codebase of tools and components, developed over the past 5 years, all based on Lua. It is, by no means, "use and throw away". You can easily version libs with semver - perhaps it is not as strict as something like Elm but it works.

You just write about Lua, do you know the Java scope? I know most of the lua libraries and i have used a lot of them over the past 10 years. But for business software (not games) it's very uncommon. I would say it's rarely used.

Java is hard work.
Lua is fun!

Sorry but this is disingenious. As fun as Lua is, this quote leads one to believe that Lua cannot be used for real work. I could not disagree more! We have over 125 games shipped, all of them made, you guessed it, in Lua.
If that is not fit for hard work, then I don't know what is.

I think you mean "disingenuous"? I better push this to back to you ;-).

Sorry but I was not talking about this scope. When you work in a team with 125 developers of 5 years on one softwareproject, lua is def. not the choice of your software architect.

Java is this


Lua is this

[OttoRobba]

You just write about Lua, do you know the Java scope? I know most of the lua libraries and i have used a lot of them over the past 10 years. But for business software (not games) it's very uncommon. I would say it's rarely used.

Rarely used has no relation with being a "throw-away" tool. On the mobile gamedev space, it is really essential tech.

I think you mean "disingenuous"? I better push this to back to you ;-).

Yes, pardon the typo, that is what I meant

Sorry but I was not talking about this scope. When you work in a team with 125 developers of 5 years on one softwareproject, lua is def. not the choice of your software architect.

Your original point was that Java was for hard work, Lua for fun. That statement has zero to do with scope. Working in small teams is hard work as well!

Java is this
*snip*

Lua is this
*snip*

And this is a U2 concert.


Doesn't mean they are the only band in town

[radgeRayden]

If I might add to the conversation, C# is a language with a huge potential for both games and business applications and used in way more game engines, with the advantage of not being so daunting as C++. Also it's fairly similar to java in syntax and complexity, and even though it doesn't have as many 3rd party libraries, the .net framework itself is more than good enough to get you started.

So if you really want to have a more serious (as in market focused) language under your belt, C# is pretty fun and a better option given your premises.

[SiENcE]

@OttoRobba

I said, that libraries are more use and throw away! Not lua or programs!

I said this, because in lua space there is no quality instance or consortium behind widely used libraries. Thats why I said, the scope of the useage is different. If you don't want to understand this, than it's worthless to further talk with you.

Your original point was that Java was for hard work, Lua for fun.

Sorry, but it's not what I said!

This is what I said:

Java is hard work.
Lua is fun!

"Is" is NOT for"!

Please citate correct when you respond to someone!


@radgeRayden
C# is indeed a very good alternative to the java world. Sadly there is no real application server for .net beside IIS. Some design choices are even better than oracel did in the last years.