Common Lisp vs. Lua vs. SQLite Data Access Components vs. Unlambda Comparison Chart

Lua is a powerful, efficient, lightweight, embeddable scripting language. It supports procedural programming, object-oriented programming, functional programming, data-driven programming, and data description. Lua combines simple procedural syntax with powerful data description constructs based on associative arrays and extensible semantics. Lua is dynamically typed, runs by interpreting bytecode with a register-based virtual machine, and has automatic memory management with incremental garbage collection, making it ideal for configuration, scripting, and rapid prototyping. Lua has a deserved reputation for performance. To claim to be "as fast as Lua" is an aspiration of other scripting languages. Several benchmarks show Lua as the fastest language in the realm of interpreted scripting languages. Lua is fast not only in fine-tuned benchmark programs, but in real life too. Substantial fractions of large applications have been written in Lua.

Unlambda is a programming language. Nothing remarkable there. The originality of Unlambda is that it stands as the unexpected intersection of two marginal families of languages. Functional programming languages, of which the canonical representative is Scheme (a Lisp dialect). This means that the basic object manipulated by the language (and indeed the only one as far as Unlambda is concerned) is the function. Rather, Unlambda uses a functional approach to programming: the only form of objects it manipulates are functions. Each function takes a function as an argument and returns a function. Apart from a binary “apply” operation, Unlambda provides several built-in functions (the most important ones being the K and S combinators). User-defined functions can be created, but not saved or named, because Unlambda does not have any variables.