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

71–80 of 308 posts

Re: The V Programming Language

#71

Post by gingerBill »

AndyKelley wrote: post #22

[flagged]

I originally did not call this project as fraudulent rather "This is not as advertised" which talked about here: https://github.com/vlang/v/issues/35

Note: some of the comments on that issue have been deleted by the v-lang creator as they were criticizing the claims made.

However, advertising a product can do something and then releasing it stating it cannot do it yet, is one thing, but accepting money for a product that does not what is advertised, is fraud.

If the features were advertised as goals, that would not have been an issue. But these features were advertised as existing and ready to use.

Please do not give this individual money!!!

-----

If you want to support new languages that do as advertised, please support my language Odin or Andrew Kelley's language Zig.

Both are very good languages as alternatives to C but with different philosophies behind them.

Odin: https://odin-lang.org/ Zig: https://ziglang.org/

Re: The V Programming Language

#72

Post by kingkong2022 »

amedvednikov wrote: post #70
kingkong2022 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SO many comments and questions on this thread, yet you chose to reply on only the ones which point out your hypocrisy and lies that can be seen by everyone. Most of the features listed on your website are not implemented in the compiler as per "your own" readme. > No it doesn't. You can build the compiler with `clang v.c` No one is talking about building the compiler. It is about dependencies required by the V compil…

I think you are. Immediately creating a throwaway, jumping in, and spreading lies, misinformation, just like last time, when I released the playground early.

> pointed out the discrepency between the website and the readme. So either the website is wrong or the readme is wrong. If the website is wrong, you are a blatant liar. If the readme is wrong, then why am I not being able to compile V code without clang?

Am I the one spreading misinformation here?

Re: The V Programming Language

#73

Post by ConsoleTVs »

esimov wrote: post #39
lamchob wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not written in Go. Go was only used to bootstrap the first compiler. Newer compiler versions are written in V itself.

Ok I see now, but still we do not have any evidence about the source code.

Everybody needs evidence of what this is really about. At the moment, this seems to be vaporware. But it's true that it does not matter if it was Go or any other language the initial one. V claims to be a self-hosting compiler with the initial one written in Go.

Re: The V Programming Language

#74

Post by gingerBill »

amedvednikov wrote: post #70
kingkong2022 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SO many comments and questions on this thread, yet you chose to reply on only the ones which point out your hypocrisy and lies that can be seen by everyone. Most of the features listed on your website are not implemented in the compiler as per "your own" readme. > No it doesn't. You can build the compiler with `clang v.c` No one is talking about building the compiler. It is about dependencies required by the V compil…

I think you are. Immediately creating a throwaway, jumping in, and spreading lies, misinformation, just like last time, when I released the playground early.

I am the Odin creator. Please don't accuse me of spreading lies when all I have done is shown that your language is just "Not as Advertised", which I originally stated in this issue: https://github.com/vlang/v/issues/35

Note: You also deleted many comments by other individuals criticizing your claims in that issue too.

Re: The V Programming Language

#75

Post by amedvednikov »

kingkong2022 wrote: post #72
amedvednikov wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are. Immediately creating a throwaway, jumping in, and spreading lies, misinformation, just like last time, when I released the playground early.

> pointed out the discrepency between the website and the readme. So either the website is wrong or the readme is wrong. If the website is wrong, you are a blatant liar. If the readme is wrong, then why am I not being able to compile V code without clang? Am I the one spreading misinformation here?

I don't see a single valid discrepency

Re: The V Programming Language

#76

Post by amedvednikov »

gingerBill wrote: post #74
amedvednikov wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are. Immediately creating a throwaway, jumping in, and spreading lies, misinformation, just like last time, when I released the playground early.

I am the Odin creator. Please don't accuse me of spreading lies when all I have done is shown that your language is just "Not as Advertised", which I originally stated in this issue: https://github.com/vlang/v/issues/35 Note: You also deleted many comments by other individuals criticizing your claims in that issue too.

"Many comments" (2). Repeating the same lies and misinformation.

Most features requiring AST? Really? Codegeneration not possible to implement json decoding?

It's just as ridiculous as claims here like V depening on glfw and freetype.

Re: The V Programming Language

#77

Post by ConsoleTVs »

git add *

git commit -m "I want everybody to stop creating drama, and this codes maybe it's not clean or does not compile but people can now see it and therefore people can see what I claim to be a 3 file compiler with tons of features"

git push

Re: The V Programming Language

#78

Post by amedvednikov »

gingerBill wrote: post #71
AndyKelley wrote: post #22

[flagged]

I originally did not call this project as fraudulent rather "This is not as advertised" which talked about here: https://github.com/vlang/v/issues/35 Note: some of the comments on that issue have been deleted by the v-lang creator as they were criticizing the claims made. However, advertising a product can do something and then releasing it stating it cannot do it yet, is one thing, but accepting money for a product…

Classic.

Re: The V Programming Language

#79

Post by gingerBill »

amedvednikov wrote: post #62
lifthrasiir wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's the intention, the author surely has been misguided. A drama is already happening (for example, [1]). While I think it is technically possible to deliver all of them (it should be noted that it is not exactly an optimizing compiler, which makes many things easier), it is natural and understandable that people doubt its premise before the full release. [1] https://github.com/vlang/v/issues/35

I'd hardly call it a drama. Claims like it's not possible to build features without AST or codegen json decoders are just ridiculous.

That is not what I stated in the issue.

For the kind of features that you wanted in your language, not just generics, requires a form of AST (abstract syntax tree), and if you language does not have an AST, which is technically possible, then you cannot have a lot of the features you have been advertising.

Re: The V Programming Language

#80

Post by kingkong2022 »

amedvednikov wrote: post #75
kingkong2022 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> pointed out the discrepency between the website and the readme. So either the website is wrong or the readme is wrong. If the website is wrong, you are a blatant liar. If the readme is wrong, then why am I not being able to compile V code without clang? Am I the one spreading misinformation here?

I don't see a single valid discrepency

Lol what? Why did you remove the release then? Isn't that because you want to clean up the readme before re-releasing it?

Anyways, I am done talking to you.

Post reply on HN