Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only incredibly inexperienced people think indentation in python is a problem.
I have tons of experience with python, possibly more actual work experience than any other language, and I do think the indentation is a bit of a problem. Obviously not a huge one, but still something I wished they had done differently. Because I like to have a robust format-on-save wired into my editor, and you just cannot quite have that when indentation is meaningful.
Mojo 1.0 Beta
61–70 of 252 posts
Re: Mojo 1.0 Beta
#62As someone in ML who's interested in performance, I'm keen for Mojo to succeed - especially the prospect of mixing GPU and CPU code in the same language. But I do wonder if the changes they're making will dissuade Python devs. The last time I booted it up, I tried to do some basic string manipulation just to test stuff out, but spent an hour puzzling out why `var x = 'hello'; print(x[3])` didn't work, and neither did…
All the flaws I can think of in Kotlin are due to the Java compatibility. They could've made it work here by being more explicit but the way it currently works seems doomed.
Re: Mojo 1.0 Beta
#63As someone in ML who's interested in performance, I'm keen for Mojo to succeed - especially the prospect of mixing GPU and CPU code in the same language. But I do wonder if the changes they're making will dissuade Python devs. The last time I booted it up, I tried to do some basic string manipulation just to test stuff out, but spent an hour puzzling out why `var x = 'hello'; print(x[3])` didn't work, and neither did…
> As someone in ML who's interested in performance, I'm keen for Mojo to succeed - especially the prospect of mixing GPU and CPU code in the same language. But I do wonder if the changes they're making will dissuade Python devs. Unless it's open sourced, it's a moot point, as most Python devs wont come anyway.
Re: Mojo 1.0 Beta
#64Re: Mojo 1.0 Beta
#65I’m relatively new to programming but I wish they had used a functional language syntax rather than an object oriented one as the basis for mojo. From my experience, AI revolves a lot around building up function pipelines, computing their derivatives, and passing tons of data through them; which composability and higher order functions from functional programming make it a breeze to describe. I also feel that other f…
The vast majority of real world ML code today is written in languages like Python and C++. Relatively few people outside of academia and online forums are functional language enthusiasts. The industry is also looking like most actual coding is going to be done by LLMs going forward, so it makes little sense to design new languages with a niche potential user base since LLMs need a ton of training data. I’m think that…
Re: Mojo 1.0 Beta
#66Python cuTile JIT compiler allows writing CUDA kernels in straight Python.
AMD and Intel are following up with similar approaches.
If Mojo will still arrive on time to gain wider adoption remains to be seen.
Re: Mojo 1.0 Beta
#67When I first heard about Mojo I somehow got the impression that they intended to make it compatible with existing Python code. But it seems like they are very far away from that for the foreseeable future. I guess you can call back and forth between Python and Mojo but Mojo itself can't run existing Python code.
If you paid very close attention it was actually clear from the start that the idea was to build a next gen systems language, taking the lessons from Swift and Rust, targeting CPU/GPU/Heterogeneous targets, and building around MLIR. But then also building it with an eye towards eventually embedding/extending Python relatively easily. The Python framing almost certainly helped raise money. Chris Lattner talked more ab…
Re: Mojo 1.0 Beta
#68Sadly for them, Nvidia didn't stay still in the meantime and created the next generation of CUDA, CuTile for Python and soon for C++, through CUDA Tile IR (using a similar compiler stack based on MLIR). Event though it's not portable, it will likely have far greater usage than Mojo just by being heavely promoted by Nvidia, integrated in dev tools and working alongside existing CUDA code. Tile IR was more likely a res…
Not to mention efforts like GraalPy and PyPy.
And all these efforts work today in Windows, which is quite relevant in companies where that is the assigned device to most employees, even if the servers run Linux distros.
I keep wondering if this isn't going to be another Swift for Tensorflow kind of outcome.
Re: Mojo 1.0 Beta
#69Sadly for them, Nvidia didn't stay still in the meantime and created the next generation of CUDA, CuTile for Python and soon for C++, through CUDA Tile IR (using a similar compiler stack based on MLIR). Event though it's not portable, it will likely have far greater usage than Mojo just by being heavely promoted by Nvidia, integrated in dev tools and working alongside existing CUDA code. Tile IR was more likely a res…
People keep mistaking Mojo as good syntax for writing GPU code, and so imagine Nvidia's Python frameworks already do that. But... would CuTile work on AMD GPUs and Apple Silicon? Whatever Nvidia does will still have vendor lock-in.
You always need to touch the hardware/platform APIs at some level, because even if the same code executes the same, the observed performance, or in the case of GPUs the numeric accuracy has visible side effects.
Re: Mojo 1.0 Beta
#70Doesn't anyone here have _one_ kind word to say about its features? Every one seems to be starting with "on the other hand".