Since it's a source-to-source compiler, you can use Colony generally wherever Lua source is required. For example, I was able to follow the beginners tutorials of the Corona SDK (http://www.anscamobile.com/corona/, a cross-platform mobile SDK that uses Lua) by programming CoffeeScript instead, which was surprisingly fun.
BTW, the name seems a bit tacky for a language developed in Brazil given the colonial history. Was there another reason for naming it that I've missed?
Using javascript as a language instead of Lua for scripting though seems odd, as Lua is pretty easy to use instead.
CoffeeScript inspired syntax that compiles right to Lua.
This is cool though from a hacking perspective. Good work.
- to write code in JS rather than in Lua;
- and run the result on a platform which supports Lua but not JS?
Except in a Dilbert-like situation, where a clueless middle manager decides that using a dirty hack is safer than letting JS programmers take the 2 days it would take them to become very proficient in Lua, I can't think of one.
Most importantly, I'd bet that the intersection of developers who:
(1) can write good software; and
(2) Can write decent JS code, but can't become proficient in Lua within a couple of days;
is mostly empty.
This mirrors the idea of writing a compiler for a new language in itself as soon as possible.
Decent timing from LuaJIT1 when it was generating "dirty" Lua bytecode.
I guess programmers will always be programmers. "Ooo look, this year CPU speed has quadtripled! Let's make a compiler for X to Y which will reduce performance by only 75%; It means you can run it at the same speed as running hand-written Y last year!"
I'll cringe when I see someone creating a WoW addon using this.
