Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

BMK: use Lua instead of custom BMK-script #67

Open
GWRon opened this issue Apr 22, 2019 · 0 comments
Open

BMK: use Lua instead of custom BMK-script #67

GWRon opened this issue Apr 22, 2019 · 0 comments

Comments

@GWRon
Copy link
Contributor

GWRon commented Apr 22, 2019

Does anything speak against replacing that internal BMK-Lua-script thing with Lua?

I ask as it would help to write some helper functions to retrieve the "to use" path for extra files (.settings, .ico, ...). All of them share the same idea ("if outputfile[.ending] not found, use inputfile[.ending] - or undecorated or ..."). To have all these lines do the very same sounds ... hmpf.

Also some comments in make.bmk seem to say that they would like to call a bmk-defined-function in a bmk-defined-function - which is for now not possible.

It shouldn't be that hard to expose some functionality of BMK (or type instances) to Lua (maybe via brl.MaxLua - or my Dig/base.util.luaengine.bmx replacement). Also calling Lua functions from within BMK isn't that troublesome.

This also means we could more clearly define functions + params instead of relying on arg1, arg2 etc getting handled within BMK.

Worth the hassle or better add "bmk-lua-script"-support for calling in-script-defined functions in functions declared there too?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant