Very exciting. Closed source was one of the main things making me not try it out yet.
Any good resources for getting started? And anything on doing NumPy/SciPy-like stuff in it?
Mojo is now open source
11–20 of 108 posts
Re: Mojo is now open source
#12This is really exciting. I've been using Mojo off and on for side projects over the last two years. (copying from some previous Mojo threads) It's got an ownership system adjacent to Rust, comptime similar to Zig, and a first class dependent type system. Even more exciting, is that uses LLVM (to the best of my understanding) in some novel ways and for more optimizations.
Hm, in docs they say that dependent type system is not first class seems.
Is it even dependent? More like refinement types, which seems will be in Rust too.Also HN recently mentioned Rust building similar llvm based integration with GPU.
But compared with Python, Julia, Matlab, R, Rust, C, C++ - Mojo feel relief for working with numerics.
Re: Mojo is now open source
#13Very exciting. Closed source was one of the main things making me not try it out yet. Any good resources for getting started? And anything on doing NumPy/SciPy-like stuff in it?
NuMojo is the closest thing in the ecosystem to numpy and the final aim is offer numpy-like experience.
https://github.com/Mojo-Numerics-and-Algorithms-group/NuMojo
Re: Mojo is now open source
#14So I think the permissive license like Apache 2 without opening up for upstream contributions would be the way of future open source development. In a very similar way of SQLite. It definitely will help shield off a bunch of AI generated contributions first and foremost and then, aligning mental model with the human contributions with Mojo leader team.
Re: Mojo is now open source
#15Earlier quoted context omitted.
The innovative potential of Mojo would be constrained to relatively niche and senior dev circles until they get a Windows release, which probably won't happen anytime soon. Python keeps the throne for now.
They announced a partnership with Microsoft today.
That's quite promising - https://www.modular.com/blog/modcon-announcements#:~:text=Wi...
Re: Mojo is now open source
#16Very exciting. Closed source was one of the main things making me not try it out yet. Any good resources for getting started? And anything on doing NumPy/SciPy-like stuff in it?
NuMojo is the closest thing in the ecosystem to numpy and the final aim is offer numpy-like experience. https://github.com/Mojo-Numerics-and-Algorithms-group/NuMojo
Can't you just use Numpy directly in Mojo?
Re: Mojo is now open source
#17Very exciting. Closed source was one of the main things making me not try it out yet. Any good resources for getting started? And anything on doing NumPy/SciPy-like stuff in it?
https://mojolang.org is the best spot for getting started generally. numojo is the closest thing to numpy right now. You can check out more packages here: https://github.com/modular/modular-community/tree/main/recip...
Re: Mojo is now open source
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
NuMojo is the closest thing in the ecosystem to numpy and the final aim is offer numpy-like experience. https://github.com/Mojo-Numerics-and-Algorithms-group/NuMojo
Can't you just use Numpy directly in Mojo?
you can but through a python interpreter in the mojo process so you get the same numpy speed with mojoptyhon interop overhead.
NuMojo is native and also is now starting to support features that numpy can't really do like native GPU execution.
Re: Mojo is now open source
#19As long as it was proprietary, I could ignore it. Now, I guess I have to learn a little something about it.
Re: Mojo is now open source
#20Technically soruce available now with the promise of accepting contributions (thus becoming fully open source) early next year. But since it is an Apache 2 license (like the rest of the LLVM project) you are already allowed to fork and contribute to your own fork right now, just no upstreaming. For many the closed source nature of the compiler was a knock-out criterion. We will see if Mojo can gain traction now or if…
You're just making up your own definitions of things.
If the complete source is available and distributable under an OSI-approved license, it is absolutely Open Source. Accepting outside contributions is nowhere in the definition of Open Source.