Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The V Programming Language

vlang.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 308 posts

Re: The V Programming Language

#42

Post by lifthrasiir »

blondin wrote: post #20

weird how other language creators are ganging up against the author here...

Because language creators do know what is possible and what is hard. I think the Odin's creator has made some mistakes when presenting one's criticism [1] but even without knowing much PL knowledge AndyKelley is very clearly showing that it is shady.

[1] https://github.com/vlang/v/issues/35 (For example, there are ways to implement generics or interfaces without AST, much harder but a possible endeavor.)

Re: The V Programming Language

#43

Post by jcelerier »

letters90 wrote: post #8

I'm curious but too lazy to look it up myself. SO I'll just ask. How far does the 'linux' specification go. Say I want to run a V program on AIX what kind of libraries will I need? What about the 'windows' specification. Do the redistributables support windows 2000/7/Vista/8/8.1/10 We have a lot of different systems on our clients, mac as well. It would be nice to read concrete requirements for running to really see…

Well, AIX is fairly unrelated to Linux...

Re: The V Programming Language

#44

Post by noncoml »

lifthrasiir wrote: post #30
noncoml wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn’t see much code in his github so I assume it’s all smoke and mirrors. How does this even get voted so high here? Just on the claims?

Because the author is simultaneously working on the Volt IM [1] and the language to make Volt? I can't really say about Volt as I haven't used it, but it is enough to establish that some concrete development is in progress. But you can't really sell an incomplete programming language in this way. [1] https://volt-app.com/

What does working on multiple projects has to do with code availability?

Re: The V Programming Language

#45

Post by lifthrasiir »

noncoml wrote: post #44
lifthrasiir wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the author is simultaneously working on the Volt IM [1] and the language to make Volt? I can't really say about Volt as I haven't used it, but it is enough to establish that some concrete development is in progress. But you can't really sell an incomplete programming language in this way. [1] https://volt-app.com/

What does working on multiple projects has to do with code availability?

Because Volt must have been written in V (please let me know if a counterevidence exists), V must have been at least mature enough to write Volt. I'm pretty sure that V does exist at this stage, but that doesn't convince me that it is viable, nor that it can get that much money.

Re: The V Programming Language

#46

Post by bendmorris »

lifthrasiir wrote: post #45
noncoml wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does working on multiple projects has to do with code availability?

Because Volt must have been written in V (please let me know if a counterevidence exists), V must have been at least mature enough to write Volt. I'm pretty sure that V does exist at this stage, but that doesn't convince me that it is viable, nor that it can get that much money.

>Because Volt must have been written in V (please let me know if a counterevidence exists)

The source of V or any substantial V project haven't been released, and the author making inaccurate claims about the compiler (and taking donations on Patreon, by the way.) Why should we accept without skepticism that (closed source app) was written with (closed source language)?

Re: The V Programming Language

#47

Post by [deleted] »

bendmorris wrote: post #46
lifthrasiir wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Volt must have been written in V (please let me know if a counterevidence exists), V must have been at least mature enough to write Volt. I'm pretty sure that V does exist at this stage, but that doesn't convince me that it is viable, nor that it can get that much money.

>Because Volt must have been written in V (please let me know if a counterevidence exists) The source of V or any substantial V project haven't been released, and the author making inaccurate claims about the compiler (and taking donations on Patreon, by the way.) Why should we accept without skepticism that (closed source app) was written with (closed source language)?

[deleted]

Re: The V Programming Language

#48

Post by lifthrasiir »

bendmorris wrote: post #46
lifthrasiir wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Volt must have been written in V (please let me know if a counterevidence exists), V must have been at least mature enough to write Volt. I'm pretty sure that V does exist at this stage, but that doesn't convince me that it is viable, nor that it can get that much money.

>Because Volt must have been written in V (please let me know if a counterevidence exists) The source of V or any substantial V project haven't been released, and the author making inaccurate claims about the compiler (and taking donations on Patreon, by the way.) Why should we accept without skepticism that (closed source app) was written with (closed source language)?

Have you ever analyzed the released Volt binary? It has symbols like this:

    000000010001dc30 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _f_1
    000000010001eba0 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _f_10
    00000001000219a0 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _f_100
    [...snip...]
    000000010004bae0 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _f_462
    000000010002a430 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _f_463
    0000000100037940 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _f_464
    000000010001f2f0 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _f_465
    0000000100020220 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _f_47
    0000000100020240 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _f_48
    00000001000202b0 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _f_49
    [...snip...]
    00000001000182a0 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _string_add
    000000010001a110 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _string_all_after
    000000010001a020 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _string_all_before
    000000010001a090 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _string_all_before_last
    0000000100019ef0 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _string_at
    0000000100018540 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _string_clone
    0000000100018aa0 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _string_contains
    0000000100018610 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _string_cstr
    0000000100019470 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _string_ends_with
    0000000100018b30 g       0f SECT   01 0000 [.text] _string_eq
While you can always mangle symbols, it is strange that i) every symbol is in public and ii) only some of them are mangled. Therefore I think the binary was probably produced by V's C transpiler, with some V standard library functions slapped on them.

(I had to rewrite the reply because I later realized that the binary was packed with UPX, I should have thoroughly inspected strings. Sorry for inconvenience.)

Re: The V Programming Language

#49

Post by lajawfe »

Let's not consider it released until the source is released. So much confusion surrounding this language.

Edit: The author has redacted the binary release and says will release the binaries with the source on July 22nd [1], thus, this post is invalid at this point as nothing is released.

[1] https://twitter.com/v_language/status/1141625734953390081

Re: The V Programming Language

#50

Post by truth_seeker »

No null

No global variables

No undefined values

No undefined behavior

No variable shadowing

Bounds checking

Option/Result types

Generics

Immutable variables by default

Pure functions by default

Immutable structs by default

me> Wow. That's a good feature set to have !

Post reply on HN