[jacknews]

Lua is just a much simpler language at heart.

Python does have the 'there should be one, preferably only one, way to do it' mantra, but to me it utterly fails at that, and is in fact a bit of a 'kitchen sink' or 'armchair' language.

That is it's strength in some ways, it's easy and approachable, and has more libraries than perhaps any other language, so you can usually get something working fairly quickly.

But it's not so suited to sparse environments. You can't easily turn a plump armchair with automatic footrests and telescoping side-tables into a plywood Eames.

[qznc]

Python is easy. Lua is simple.

The problem of "easy" is that it implies hidden complexity for its magic. The problem of "simple" is that it requires more work from its users.

[3036e4]

Python also seems to have more issues with stability, in the sense that things randomly stop working when you upgrade from version 3.x to 3.x+1. Lua might not be perfect either, but at least it seems common that a platform supports a range of Lua versions instead of forcing an immediate upgrade.

[marky1991]

Could you give some examples?

[3036e4]

No, but we have a steady stream of tickets at work for scripts that must be fixed to work with a new minor python version.

I thought this was common knowledge. Just look at the non-empty list of removed things in every minor release changelog. If you have enough code to maintain something is going to affect you directly or indirectly.

https://docs.python.org/pl/dev/whatsnew/3.15.html