Escen wrote:
I picked toLua++ as a binder mainly for two reasons.
-it was relative easy to setup.
-getting the result I wanted.(for now)
Good reasons. Never heard of toLua++, and here I'd already seen a large list of Lua->C++ bindings.
Escen wrote:
I'm exposing my entire engine through my scene-manager, this way I'm able to handling most detail from Lua.
Mainly for now I'm using lua to initialize objects and controlling wind forces en sun stuff, this gives me no problem...
I got it all working but wondering if I'm getting into speed problems when using toLua++ as AI controller and I'm not sure there is a better way of scripting.
Didn't do any further research yet but maybe you can advise me on this.
Any time you use an interpreted language, things slow down. That said, it's best to try to minimize the number of times your program has to reference the Lua document(s). Use Lua as a base to set things up (perhaps generic settings), but after setup, there should be minimal if any intervention of the scripted language. That said, you can setup your scene, but then the Lua would initiate stand-alone functionality.
If you're looking for real speed out of an interpreted language, it helps using one that pre-compiles into a byte-code, like D (though again, the speed will depend on the implementation of the bindings you choose). A byte-code is really just a faster way for the program to process commands. Syntax is just rules for programmers.
