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

The Borgo Programming Language

borgo-lang.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 204 posts

Re: The Borgo Programming Language

#81

Post by nine_k »

Philpax wrote: post #9
kjksf wrote: post #6

I love it. This is a language that everyone here says they want but no one will use, even though it's stable and mature (I assume because it compiles to stable and mature Go and can use every existing Go library). It hits all the "ok, Go is popular but made by morons for morons and if only it had this X advanced feature, it would be totally great". It has immutability. It has advanced enums. It has algebraic types. I…

I don't think the impediment to adoption is the syntax - that's straightforward enough - it's the ecosystem / tooling / network effects. I love this, even though I don't interact with Go on a regular basis, but I recognise that I'd be locking myself out of a lot of the standard Go tooling if I adopted this wholesale. For better or for worse, there's a high ecosystem barrier that most languages must overcome to be ado…

What standard tooling would fail, given that the translation goes via a a generated Go source?

I suppose there must be some borgofmt that handles the particular syntax. Certainly debuggers would have to be updated to show the corresponding Borgo code line at least.

What else?

Re: The Borgo Programming Language

#82

Post by nine_k »

alexvitkov wrote: post #25
kjksf wrote: post #6

I love it. This is a language that everyone here says they want but no one will use, even though it's stable and mature (I assume because it compiles to stable and mature Go and can use every existing Go library). It hits all the "ok, Go is popular but made by morons for morons and if only it had this X advanced feature, it would be totally great". It has immutability. It has advanced enums. It has algebraic types. I…

> Because the harsh truth is that none of those things are actually big issues that would justify learning slightly different syntax. The syntax has nothing to do with it, you already know the syntax. I'm fairly confident most people reading this comment can program in this language right now, without opening the docs. The reasons I won't be using it are: 1. It's a source to source transpiler - even when done nearly…

How does Zig look from where you sit?

Re: The Borgo Programming Language

#83

Post by DecoySalamander »

nine_k wrote: post #79
mst wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I find truly fascinating is that given the complexity of most build systems (especially ones that use babel) basically every node project I encounter is in fact effectively transpiled, it's just it's "javascript compiled to javascript" rather than having a different source syntax. I don't even mind[0], I think it's actually kind of amazing. [0] I have all the usual complaints about build systems and about the no…

But it's the minimal translation to allow newer language features and APIs to be still used in older browsers. OTOH I haven't seen a pure JavaScript project for a number of years. It's all Typescript now, maybe with some vestiges of legacy JS slated for eventual migration to TS.

There are people who insist on writing JS (with types in JSDoc), but Svelte is the only such project I can name off the top of my head.

Re: The Borgo Programming Language

#84

Post by nine_k »

renox wrote: post #60
kjksf wrote: post #6

I love it. This is a language that everyone here says they want but no one will use, even though it's stable and mature (I assume because it compiles to stable and mature Go and can use every existing Go library). It hits all the "ok, Go is popular but made by morons for morons and if only it had this X advanced feature, it would be totally great". It has immutability. It has advanced enums. It has algebraic types. I…

You're right nobody will use it: it's a one man language are you going to bet your codebase on it? It probably doesn't have any tooling, debugggers.. Are the error messages from the compiler good?

Elm is also a one-man language, but it enjoyed some popularity. Zig has been a one-man language for some time, but it's got traction, following, and more contributors.

Syntax squiggles are not very important, but other language features, like a good design and removing whole classes of bugs, are.

Re: The Borgo Programming Language

#85

Post by scythe »

Aldipower wrote: post #78
kjksf wrote: post #6

I love it. This is a language that everyone here says they want but no one will use, even though it's stable and mature (I assume because it compiles to stable and mature Go and can use every existing Go library). It hits all the "ok, Go is popular but made by morons for morons and if only it had this X advanced feature, it would be totally great". It has immutability. It has advanced enums. It has algebraic types. I…

JavaScript had Netscape behind it, TypeScript has Microsoft behind it, Rust had Mozilla behind it, Go has Google behind it, Java had Sun behind it, C++ had AT&T behind it, and so on.. Borgo? Cannot think about much languages that haven't any bigger company behind it. PHP maybe? To an extend Python? But today Python good pushed by the big companies of the AI hype.

Python was obscure and developed in silence for 15 years before it caught on. The team behind it just never gave up. Most people who develop independent languages give up after a year or five. Lua is similar, though it and PHP both caught on faster because they both put embedding upfront, which allowed them to be built into game engines and websites built with C.

Re: The Borgo Programming Language

#86

Post by nine_k »

pjmlp wrote: post #58
throwaway127482 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not trying to fix Go, it's trying to be a new programming language. It just happens to compile to Go, and allows Go interop.

Which is a way to use Go, while not using Go. Hence better invest into ecosytems that value language design PhDs....

No, it's a way of writing a better language while using Go libraries extensively. The same way Kotlin is a way of writing a better language while using Java libraries extensively.

Re: The Borgo Programming Language

#87

Post by mindaslab »

cosmic_quanta wrote: post #45
mindaslab wrote: post #22

[flagged]

Let's be substantive : What makes Borgo junk? Can you seriously see nothing interesting here compared to Clojure?

For example, having the equal to (=), to assign variable is junk. I am sorry if people can't understand what I say.

Re: The Borgo Programming Language

#89

Post by pjmlp »

nine_k wrote: post #86
pjmlp wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is a way to use Go, while not using Go. Hence better invest into ecosytems that value language design PhDs....

No, it's a way of writing a better language while using Go libraries extensively. The same way Kotlin is a way of writing a better language while using Java libraries extensively.

The difference is that JVM community welcomes languages PhD folks.

There is even the JVM Languages Summit.

Unthinkable in Go ecosystem.

Re: The Borgo Programming Language

#90

Post by nine_k »

pjmlp wrote: post #89
nine_k wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's a way of writing a better language while using Go libraries extensively. The same way Kotlin is a way of writing a better language while using Java libraries extensively.

The difference is that JVM community welcomes languages PhD folks. There is even the JVM Languages Summit. Unthinkable in Go ecosystem.

Maybe because Go is not a VM?
Post reply on HN