Although there should not be any obstacles for porting (or re-implementing) MetaLua on top of the most modern luajit.
> The main difference should be that the base type will be arrays and tables not lists, but that could be an improvement.
That should only matter in compile time anyway, for your meta-language. Target may use whatever data structures you want.
> I'll probably tack on something like s-expressions too.
It's not necessary for a meta-language, as long as you have quasiquotation (that works both for constructing ASTs and for pattern-matching them). It's just the easiest way, but not the only one.
Although there should not be any obstacles for porting (or re-implementing) MetaLua on top of the most modern luajit.
> The main difference should be that the base type will be arrays and tables not lists, but that could be an improvement.
That should only matter in compile time anyway, for your meta-language. Target may use whatever data structures you want.
> I'll probably tack on something like s-expressions too.
It's not necessary for a meta-language, as long as you have quasiquotation (that works both for constructing ASTs and for pattern-matching them). It's just the easiest way, but not the only one.