Because I know javascript a lot more than I know Lua (and I suspect given js popularity, a lot of people are in the same boat). Yes Lua is easy to learn, but it's still different enough that there is friction. The differences also aren't just syntactically, it's also libraries/APIs, and more. I also don't have any need/use for Lua beyond neovim, so it's basically having to learn a language specifically for one tool. It's not ideal for me.

But the people who did the work wanted Lua, and I have no problem with that. That's their privilege as the people doing the work. I'm still free to fork it and make ruby or js or whatever (Elixir would be awesome!) first-class.

▲

01100011 5 hours ago | parent [-]

I agree but also wonder if editor plugins fall squarely in the range of things an LLM could vibe-code for me?

There is a large class of problems now for which I consider the chosen programming language to be irrelevant. I don't vibe code my driver code/systems programming stuff, but my helper scripts, gdb extensions, etc are mostly written or maintained by an LLM now.

	▲	metrix 5 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I'm right there with you, and to be honest Lua just works. I helped with Neovim when it started ~10 years ago, and didn't understand the big deal about implementing lua.. But now that it's here, I can't believe it wasn't forked and implemented sooner
	▲	maleldil 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		IME, Claude is quite good at generating Lua code for neovim. It takes some back and forth because there's no easy way for it to directly test what it's writing, but it works.