LuaJIT vs luac for custom Lua bytecode interpreter [closed]

Question

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.

Closed 8 years ago.

Related: Differences between standard Lua bytecode and LuaJIT bytecode

I'm writing a Lua bytecode interpreter, and I'm trying to decide between LuaJIT and luac to generate the initial bytecode. Since I'm writing an interpreter, I'm not going to get any of the JIT performance, so it all comes down to the quality of the compiler and design of the generated bytecode.

Is either compiler significantly better?

I'm writing this in Dart (also interpreted), so any free optimization from the compiler is appreciated.

Answer 1

I would go for LuaJIT bytecode. Mike Pall has written that compared to standard Lua bytecode, LuaJIT bytecode is 40% smaller. Also, Tim Caswell (contributor to node.js) has announced a new project called brozula, which allows you to convert LuaJIT bytecode into JavaScript and execute it in browser, so head over to the project site for some inspiration.