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

The Hare programming language

harelang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 323 posts

Re: The Hare programming language

#131

Post by aledue »

ddevault wrote: post #29
aledue wrote: post #24

Are hare's tagged unions and pattern matching comparable to ADTs found in functional languages? I really miss them in C and would like a "better C" that offers them. Rust does, but of course it's a much bigger language.

They are a subset, I suppose. I'm not an expert at functional programming so I couldn't say. The tutorial which introduces tagged unions is here: https://harelang.org/tutorials/introduction/#tagged-unions-i... They are also covered in section 6.5.18 of the Hare specification: https://harelang.org/specification.pdf Would be curious to hear your thoughts on how they compare given your (presumed) background in functiona…

Thank you, from the other replies it seems like they would be enough for my needs.

> Would be curious to hear your thoughts on how they compare given your (presumed) background in functional programming.

I'm just a student with an interest in programming languages and very little knowledge and experience, so I don't think I'll be able to provide any significant insight ;)

Re: The Hare programming language

#134

Post by [deleted] »

2pEXgD0fZ5cF wrote: post #123
pizza234 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> This summarizes everything one needs to know Your comment comes off as very dishonest. How does this quote summarize "everything I need to know". The quote you show appears to be out of context, I followed your link and that it appears to be a conclusion following a number of points explaining why, for the author, Rust's safety feature is apparently not enough to counterbalance it's flaws. I don't fully agree with…

[deleted]

Re: The Hare programming language

#136

Post by staticassertion »

Shadonototra wrote: post #129
kaba0 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sanitizers can only show you some memory problems that happen during a given runtime with given data . And your 10+ minutes baseless assumption is just demonstratively false. In the default debug mode it is literally instant with human perception on my current, not small project. Longer compiles only happen in release mode or when you introduce new dependencies. Shall I link you to Valgrind bugs as well?

> And your 10+ minutes baseless assumption is just demonstratively false Ok, not 10+ minutes, more like 6 minutes on a beefy machine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nR2WDBMjkh8&t=976s > Shall I link you to Valgrind bugs as well? See, you fail to understand the point

As was already stated, sanitizers catch a subset of issues and rely on test coverage. Sanitizers have been in use by projects for years, with lots of money spent on fuzzing and test coverage, and there are still numerous issues.

Re: The Hare programming language

#137

Post by staticassertion »

ninjin wrote: post #126

Happy to see “secretlang” out in the open! I have been following development from afar and really like the idea of a “simple” take on a language, but with a lot of wisdom and affordances added since the state of the world back in 1972. In short, Hare seems to be a language that I really should like and I want to take it for a spin. What I find a bit confusing though is the licensing. I belong to the “BSD school”, but…

The license seems straightforward. You can use and distribute software written in Hare, but if you want to link or make changes to the tooling (compiler, etc) you must open source those.

Re: The Hare programming language

#138

Post by kaba0 »

vladharbuz wrote: post #4
Isinlor wrote: post #3

I don't see any explanation of why this language exists. Does it do something better than any other language?

My two cents: low-level programming languages (e.g. with manual memory management) are essential for tasks like writing operating systems, video games, real-time audio applications and other such things. There are few low-level programming languages available currently. The most used is C, and while it has its wonderful parts, C can also cause a lot of headaches and bugs. Whether C++ is a good replacement is a can of…

Not trying to take away anything, but just from the top of my head: Zig, Rust, Odin, Beef lang and then don’t forget about those that even precede C like Fortran or Pascal.

Re: The Hare programming language

#139

Post by ninjin »

sanxiyn wrote: post #130
ninjin wrote: post #126

Happy to see “secretlang” out in the open! I have been following development from afar and really like the idea of a “simple” take on a language, but with a lot of wisdom and affordances added since the state of the world back in 1972. In short, Hare seems to be a language that I really should like and I want to take it for a spin. What I find a bit confusing though is the licensing. I belong to the “BSD school”, but…

I think you are reacting too strongly. Really, what's the problem?

Thank you for the sanity check. It is difficult for me to articulate really, but I guess I (perhaps in error?) have deferred battles over say proprietary drivers away from programming language licensing (just so that there is no confusion here, I am fairly hard line in terms of the usage of proprietary software for my own personal use; only falling marginally short of the FSF party line). Perhaps seeing this has me fearing that the project’s goals are more ideological than technical (or at least that a core of the community sees it that way?), while I (perhaps naively?) have a more laissez-faire approach believing that superior software is the way to software freedom and that legal “trickery” is a Faustian bargain in the end. I guess the feeling that arises in akin to when I see GNU projects banning even the mention of proprietary software from their communication channels. It has little effect on my excitement and respect for the software itself, but it comes across (to me) as somewhat misguided zealotry.

Sorry for the mess in terms of my writing. It has been months since I first saw the licensing and I still do not know how to internalise it properly.

Re: The Hare programming language

#140

Post by ninjin »

staticassertion wrote: post #137
ninjin wrote: post #126

Happy to see “secretlang” out in the open! I have been following development from afar and really like the idea of a “simple” take on a language, but with a lot of wisdom and affordances added since the state of the world back in 1972. In short, Hare seems to be a language that I really should like and I want to take it for a spin. What I find a bit confusing though is the licensing. I belong to the “BSD school”, but…

The license seems straightforward. You can use and distribute software written in Hare, but if you want to link or make changes to the tooling (compiler, etc) you must open source those.

Yes, legally it is perfectly clear. Just not the why. Is there any other language that has taken a similar approach? Has this been discussed in relation to Hare somewhere apart from the brief chunk of text that I linked? I am perfectly accepting that I may be in error here in terms of how I view licensing, but it bothers me that I can not build a mental model of the intentions of the authors.
Post reply on HN