Could you consider choosing another name for the language?
mojo doesn't sound sexy.
Ask for suggestions.
Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers
111–120 of 272 posts
Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers
#112This is the final nail in the coffin for "Julia as a replacement for Python" in my eyes. Maybe I'm very late to that conclusion, maybe the writing's been on the wall for a while, but I still held out hope that Julia could be at least a parallel peer to Python sharing the market.
But now, it seems almost certain that Julia will end up a possible replacement-for-Matlab niche language, unknown and unused by most outside the niche. It's a pretty big and important niche, to be sure, but a bit disappointing given how nice the language is.
Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers
#113Wonder how this compares to Nim.
Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn’t Python though, right? It’s just a Python-like syntax for a much lower level programming language (sort of like Cython) from my cursory glance? It seems a lot like Rust with a Pythonic veneer, so I would expect it will run into many of the same problems that Rust has (lots of difficulty pacifying the borrow checker)?
The source code is Python (well, a superset of Python), but it's not interpreted and run by the official Python interpreter. Judging by what I've seen so far, it seems Modular has been able to "Rustify+Tritonify" Python code in a way that to me feels... very Pythonic.
Maybe someone can correct me, but I don't think it's a superset of Python--I don't think it will accept existing Python programs and I'm pretty sure you can't do all of the dynamic Python stuff (otherwise you would have to essentially compile/link an interpreter into your binaries giving you these super slow paths that aren't necessarily obvious when reading source code).
> Judging by what I've seen so far, it seems Modular has been able to "Rustify+Tritonify" Python code in a way that to me feels... very Pythonic.
I think it "feels Pythonic" because you're looking at Pythonic syntax. I suspect when you're banging your head against a borrow checker it will feel more like writing Rust. Like I'm pretty sure anything with a borrow checker will have to deal with lifetimes, mutable-vs-immutable references, shared mutability (cell/refcell in rust), etc; I don't know how you "Pythonify" that in any meaningful way?
Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it won't. The language is not a super-set of Python, its another language that somewhat resembles Python. You can't drop in some Python code and run it with Mojo and expect it to work.
The goal is for the language to be a superset of Python > Further, we decided that the right long-term goal for Mojo is to provide a superset of Python (i.e. be compatible with existing programs) and to embrace the CPython immediately for long-tail ecosystem enablement. https://docs.modular.com/mojo/why-mojo.html
But see the section "Intentional differences from Python", which is after your quote,
https://docs.modular.com/mojo/why-mojo.html#intentional-diff...
> our approach to compatibility is two fold:
> 1. We utilize CPython to run all existing Python3 code “out of the box” without modification and use its runtime, unmodified, for full compatibility with the entire ecosystem.
> 2. We will provide a mechanical migrator that provides very good compatibility for people who want to move Python code to Mojo.
> Together, this allows Mojo to integrate well in a mostly-CPython world, but allows Mojo programmers to be able to progressively move code (a module or file at a time) to Mojo. This approach was used and proved by the Objective-C to Swift migration that Apple performed.
Maybe the long-term goal is to try to make it a true superset, but it sounds like the detailed plan is more practical, to basically provide a "Python-next" language, like Swift for Objective-C.
Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
Matlab existed for a reason, and has since become irrelevant, in particular in the face of python being used as a more flexible open source scientific computing scripting language. If this is closed source, it's already as irrelevant as matlab so no reason to fight it. If there are useful bits there will be python versions of them.
Strongly disagree with this statement (and agree with the parent). In many hard engineering disciplines, appropriate solvers (e.g. SuiteSparse) are barely supported, if at all (e.g. scikit-sparse only supports CHOLMOD, and UMFPACK is supported via another package). People overestimate how many people are willing to work on the "wrap C numerical library in Python" problem. On the other hand, Mathworks employs many peo…
Sounds like a niche to me, with lots of options (wrapping C numerical libraries in python) for people that don't want to be locked in.
When I was in school 15 years ago, matlab was pretty ubiquitous.
Maybe it was to strong to say it's irrelevant as opposed to niche, though it's definitely irrelevant in many fields where it used to be king. I do miss the figures though, I liked the combination of programmatic formatting + manual tweaks.
Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers
#117Chris Lattner of LLVM and Swift fame is behind mojo
Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers
#118This is the final nail in the coffin for "Julia as a replacement for Python" in my eyes. Maybe I'm very late to that conclusion, maybe the writing's been on the wall for a while, but I still held out hope that Julia could be at least a parallel peer to Python sharing the market. But now, it seems almost certain that Julia will end up a possible replacement-for-Matlab niche language, unknown and unused by most outside…
Predicting language ecosystem development is difficult, especially if its about the future. It does feel that Julia may have missed its window of opportunity. But maybe not.
On the one hand Python's mindshare has been growing exponentially, riding on successive waves of data science, machine learning, deep learning, AI and now AGI hypes. NB: The two hypes it did not benefit from (for obvious reasons) are big data and crypto/blockchain. Given, though, Python's heavy historical baggage, you could think that eventually gravity would re-assert itself - with a potential crash landing.
So in a sense, if the mojo project succeeds becoming a very broad based renewal effort (a Python 4 thing) that fixes some of Python's limitations, it will lock-in Python's current amazing popularity. If not, then the field is still open for a challenger and Julia could well be that.
The broader technology space feels very febrile right now. Lots of talk, much less walk. The winners will be simply those who deliver tangible "next-gen" experiences to developers and end-users.
Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers
#119Finally, the package management ecosystem of Python with the compiler speed and error messages of Rust and Swift.
Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers
#120There are a bunch of questions about Julia, so I'll do my best to give a short answer to a very long and complicated topic. Up front, Julia is a wonderful language and a wonderful community, I am a super fan. That said, Mojo is a completely different thing. It is aligned with the Python community to solve specific problems outlined here: https://docs.modular.com/mojo/why-mojo.html Mojo also has a bunch of technical a…
Congratulations on the launch! I think it's always a great thing to have people who know what they're doing put a new design out there. Raises the bar for everyone. For example, I think the Rust folks' work on error messages has really raised the bar on what is expected of systems is that regard. Sometimes people working on older systems feel a bit uncomfortable they see the bar being raised on them (it's weird to me…
Thank you Keno!