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

Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers

modular.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 272 posts

Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers

#171

Post by jph00 »

adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #169
jph00 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mojo can actually create fully standalone binaries, so you don't even need a Mojo install to run them! Also the binaries are really small compared to languages that need a big runtime (e.g. a binary containing the matmul implementation is ~100kb). I'm not sure how long it will take before there's enough ML/DL functionality to write something like fastai in Mojo. I think there will be at least one more major version o…

How does that work given that the binary needs to lug around a CPython binary (unless you want to depend on the OS python)? Also, how does this deal with python libraries?

The binary doesn't need to lug around a CPython binary. Mojo is a compiler that uses MLIR to compile standalone binaries.

(Unless you use `python.import`, which uses the CPython interpreter.)

Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers

#172

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

jph00 wrote: post #171
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does that work given that the binary needs to lug around a CPython binary (unless you want to depend on the OS python)? Also, how does this deal with python libraries?

The binary doesn't need to lug around a CPython binary. Mojo is a compiler that uses MLIR to compile standalone binaries. (Unless you use `python.import`, which uses the CPython interpreter.)

but won't that include most applications for the foreseeable future? I assume no one is going to be rewriting the entire data processing/web stack from python to mojo in the near future, right?

Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers

#173

Post by WinLychee »

moelf wrote: post #62
UncleOxidant wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Julia is far more mature and advanced in many ways. Many folks have and will continue to push Julia forward and we wish them the best, it is a lovely ecosystem and language. There is room for more than one thing! :) In general this tends to be true. However, in this case I'm not so sure. Modular seems to have garnered a lot of investment - probably orders of magnitude more than the Julia community has been able to…

This is too real and any of the great investment of manpower (e.g. Tensorflow for Swift) if happened to Julia would probably be 10x or 100x in terms of ROI -- just look at how few devs and line of code Julia's alternative to pandas/numpy/ML/autodidf/plotting has. If Julia ecosystem can be somewhat competitive while only having part time and researchers' side project contributors, it WILL thrive if properly invested.

Just a thought, but perhaps it's the small community and independent culture of Julia that has led to the high quality of its software. Small groups of highly passionate people can accomplish a lot! If I recall the history correctly, scientific Python (numpy, scipy, etc) developed similarly at first and has mostly supplanted Matlab, Fortran, and other tools. There was a point in time when Python was considered niche and not for "serious" work :).

Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers

#175

Post by fvncc »

jph00 wrote: post #156
fvncc wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi is there any plan to have high level model training tools (one example is things like Pytorch dataset loaders), or is the focus more on inference/deployment use cases?

If I have anything to do with it, there will be high level model training tools. Perhaps something a little like fastai, for instance?...

That would work nicely :)

Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers

#176

Post by dermesser »

Archit3ch wrote: post #102
dermesser wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true at all! Julia usually being JIT-compiled makes it very unsuitable for real time applications (and there's no reason why it should be great for it). GC is the least issue here, and I say that as a fan and daily user of Julia.

After the 1st JIT-compilation (which here we treat as C++ static compilation), there is no compilation cost. As long as you avoid doing dynamic things (e.g. GC), there's a great case to be made for real time Julia.

Of course, but other than in C++ you need to use ways and means to achieve this - never hitting u compiled code - that are not very natural to Julia. Yes it may be possible to compile Julia code to binaries, but it obviously is neither straightforward nor widely used.

Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers

#177

Post by cavisne »

throwawaymaths wrote: post #95
Sukera wrote: post #48

Are you afraid that you're going to "inherit" the issues the python ecosystem has through your goal of full compatibility? Or is Mojo more like Numba, in that only parts of python will actually be supported for full acceleration? At least your docs[1] seem to say so.. -- [1]: https://docs.modular.com/mojo/why-mojo.html#intentional-diff...

Agreed. I think this effort is completely missing the real pain points that ML suffers from. While python the language is easy, and in many ways great for its original purpose as a teaching language, I'll take note of the few ways that Python ML suffers: - pip hell. Really, having globally installed dependencies was great for the 90s and is terrible now that disk space is more or less a non-issue relative to dependen…

I guess their argument is the reason those things suck is because they are hooking in some c++ monstrosity (tensorflow) or making rpcs to an external daemon (redis, horovod).

So rather than writing another Python wrapper over c++ they are making a new performant language that can call Python.

To me it makes sense as torch is great and hard to compete with, but everything feeding into it is a mess today (Data loading, distribution logic).

Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers

#178

Post by programmarchy »

> No CUDA required

Nvidia has a ton of lock-in with CUDA. Seems like it could shake up the GPU industry if this takes hold as a standard tool in ML. Also, I'd imagine AMD, Intel, Apple, and others will be lining up at the door to sponsor this project.

Re: Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers

#179

Post by chrislattner »

fvncc wrote: post #175
jph00 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I have anything to do with it, there will be high level model training tools. Perhaps something a little like fastai, for instance?...

That would work nicely :)

I can't speak for others, but I think fast.ai is pretty great...
Post reply on HN