11–20 of 37 posts
So how is Mojo comparing with Hylo (formerly Val), the other former Swift creator created new language?
Heard some positive things about Mojo. But my curiousity waned after I learnt it was not open source currently. In 2024 why should I be interested in a language that is not open source ? Perhaps I'm missing something ?
The standard library is open source, you can find it here: https://github.com/modularml/mojo/tree/nightly/stdlib We'll be opening up more over time - stay tuned!
I was really really close to trying to spin up something at work using the Max Engine. However, I see that it collects telemetry [1], and we can't really allow that. Do you know if there are plans to be able to turn this entirely off at some point?
It's nice to know if I should keep it on my radar, or if I can't consider it without changing jobs :)
[1]: https://docs.modular.com/engine/faq#does-the-max-sdk-collect...
It's fashionable to hate on Mojo, but I actually hope they succeed. I started my career by writing fast, production-grade replacements for Python programs written by scientists. Without someone like me, they were squandering government-funded compute resources and wasting time on the critical path to delivering their scientific contributions. Any technological advancement that gets them more efficiency and leverage w…
I don't have the exact quote on hand, but in the Mojo Discord, Chris Latner explicitly said he wants no "compiler magic" in Mojo. With that idea in mind, Mojo makes it a lot easier to do optimizations like SIMD vectorization by hand, but you will still have to do it manually. My guess is that many scientists who don't like programming would find it annoying to hand-write those kinds of optimizations. If you want a language that gives you nice, performant code on your first attempt, Julia is always a decent option.
These are the docs for some of Mojo's higher order functions that implement vectorization, parallelization, tiling, loop switching, etc. https://docs.modular.com/mojo/stdlib/algorithm/functional
I do think they are a good idea and relatively easy to use; I'm just not convinced that the non-programmer scientist will like them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The standard library is open source, you can find it here: https://github.com/modularml/mojo/tree/nightly/stdlib We'll be opening up more over time - stay tuned!
Just in case you're in the know: I was really really close to trying to spin up something at work using the Max Engine. However, I see that it collects telemetry [1], and we can't really allow that. Do you know if there are plans to be able to turn this entirely off at some point? It's nice to know if I should keep it on my radar, or if I can't consider it without changing jobs :) [1]: https://docs.modular.com/engine…
(Then comes Meta c.s. and everyone rightly distrusts anything reported back from their computer)
This just to say, that yes, the majority of companies cannot be trusted, but there’s still good guys out there collecting useful metrics completely devoid of secondary malicious purposes.
Mojo feels like a language that's trying to be everything for everyone.
I feel the opposite, they really are focused on being a language that's great for AI and heterogeneous compute, since that's what Modular is focused on. But the features are attractive for other use cases, it has access to MLIR, compile time metaprogramming, easy and ergonomic SIMD, and soon GPU support.
Why does AI and heterogeneous compute need ownership and lifetime checks again?
These are really needed for low level pointer heavy code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just in case you're in the know: I was really really close to trying to spin up something at work using the Max Engine. However, I see that it collects telemetry [1], and we can't really allow that. Do you know if there are plans to be able to turn this entirely off at some point? It's nice to know if I should keep it on my radar, or if I can't consider it without changing jobs :) [1]: https://docs.modular.com/engine…
There’s nothing bad about telemetry per se. In fact it should be considered bad to not be paying attention to how anything you build works in the real world. (Then comes Meta c.s. and everyone rightly distrusts anything reported back from their computer) This just to say, that yes, the majority of companies cannot be trusted, but there’s still good guys out there collecting useful metrics completely devoid of seconda…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There’s nothing bad about telemetry per se. In fact it should be considered bad to not be paying attention to how anything you build works in the real world. (Then comes Meta c.s. and everyone rightly distrusts anything reported back from their computer) This just to say, that yes, the majority of companies cannot be trusted, but there’s still good guys out there collecting useful metrics completely devoid of seconda…
Intentions be damned. Some industries take IP/security very seriously (eg regulated medical). Tools which phone home “for my user experience” are a complete deal breaker.
I am really enjoying the language, the level of improvement over the last few months has been amazing. At work all our heterogeneous compute needs are implemented using C++/CUDA. I've been exploring new languages for the type of work we do on and off over the last few years: Julia, Rust, D, Chapel, and Mojo. It seems the only new languages serious about native heterogeneous compute are: Julia, Chapel, and Mojo. Of th…
As CERN alumni, and language nerd, I find Chapel quite cool.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel the opposite, they really are focused on being a language that's great for AI and heterogeneous compute, since that's what Modular is focused on. But the features are attractive for other use cases, it has access to MLIR, compile time metaprogramming, easy and ergonomic SIMD, and soon GPU support.
Okay great. Why does AI and heterogeneous compute need ownership and lifetime checks again? These are really needed for low level pointer heavy code.
It's fashionable to hate on Mojo, but I actually hope they succeed. I started my career by writing fast, production-grade replacements for Python programs written by scientists. Without someone like me, they were squandering government-funded compute resources and wasting time on the critical path to delivering their scientific contributions. Any technological advancement that gets them more efficiency and leverage w…
As someone who has been playing around with (and enjoying) Mojo, I have my doubts about how useful Mojo will end up being for your average scientist. You can't get performant code out of Mojo if you're not willing to learn some deeper programming concepts like SIMD or tiling. I don't have the exact quote on hand, but in the Mojo Discord, Chris Latner explicitly said he wants no "compiler magic" in Mojo. With that ide…