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

Mojo is available for local download

modular.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 193 posts

Re: Mojo is available for local download

#131

Post by zogrodea »

ddragon wrote: post #126
gostsamo wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if the better languages were actually good, they wouldn't have allowed python to whip their asses. Python won because it was nice and easy. meet your users where they are, not where you want them to be.

That would be simplifying too much. There are a lot of external factors for something being popular, like timing, luck, support from big enterprises and leading colleges, inertia and sunk costs. You could argue that does make python better regardless of the language itself but that poster was talking about a hypothetical scenario in which those factors were won by a language better designed for those tasks. Would you…

Richard Feldman states in a video aiming to explain the popularity of OOP that Python initially had a small community for decades, and that Python's increase in popularity followed a slow and steady increase, which is not true of many other languages like Ruby. That's corroborated by the graph in this article. [0]

Based on Python's slow and steady incresae, timing and luck don't seem like good factors for explaining its popularity. The others are debatable though.

[0]

https://flatironschool.com/blog/python-popularity-the-rise-o...

Re: Mojo is available for local download

#132

Post by demandingturtle »

umvi wrote: post #125
vorticalbox wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why not just be open source from the start? What benefits does one get from starting off closed and transitioning to open source?

Maybe you don't want the peanut gallery commenting/complaining/whatever about your architecture until you are ready (otherwise architect astronauts could inundate your comm channels with suggestions, comments, PRs, etc)

[dead]

Re: Mojo is available for local download

#133

Post by bsder »

knowsuchagency wrote: post #22

I've had high hopes for this project since its announcement, but until it's open-source, I'm not investing any time in it. That's the only announcement I care about

I agree. And I'm in the same boat about JAI.

No open source--no attention.

Otherwise, you get stuff like the "Our Machinery" fiasco: https://www.reddit.com/r/gameenginedevs/comments/wd3o33/deve...

Re: Mojo is available for local download

#134

Post by DiffProg »

fooker wrote: post #123
luma wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read the description, they started with 35,000x, then tripled the number of cores to get 68,000x. If your triple the cores and wind up with less than twice the performance, your scaling isn't very good.

It is very good, especially if you don't have to rewrite your code. Try to do it yourself (say take a merge sort implementation and try to make it scale), it'll be roughly this much after a few hours of work. Now imagine the compiler is doing this for you.

Keyword is imagine, because with Mojo you do have to write your code in a new language. You cannot use the Python parts if you want speed. That's writing code in a new language.

Re: Mojo is available for local download

#136

Post by code_biologist »

ayhanfuat wrote: post #107
chubot wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s unclear about it? It’s a closed source product by a for profit company It would be nice if it were open source, but I don’t see anything that’s unclear about the IP.

How license will evolve is unclear. I personally don't mind it starting closed to figure out a contribution model or whatever they want to sort out as long as they have clear commitment. However, the current statement for open source is so vague that I don't want to invest time on it.

I think not investing time in Mojo is the currently the correct decision. If Modular decides they have a good product and would like broad community adoption, they will make the open source and licensing decisions that would support that. They're smart and I presume aware of that dynamic, so honestly I suspect they don't want a broad community just yet.

Community management and language feature haggling is not worth the expense at an early for-profit company with an alpha language that needs to solve internal problems.

Re: Mojo is available for local download

#137

Post by mrcwinn »

chrislattner wrote: post #96
mrcwinn wrote: post #63

A rant. I apologize. I try to avoid on HN and in general. Faster, yes, but at what cost? I'm so impressed by the Python community, but I'll never quite understand why they gravitated to... Python itself. It's unbelievable to me that in Mojo's case some of the brightest, most famous engineers have gathered to do incredible computer science work to improve the compute performance of a language that is fundamentally fla…

Hey, thanks for your interest. I think it's interesting that you think I don't care about things like whitespace vs braces? In the Lex interview I was kidding around, but I assure you, I do care. Braces are strictly worse than whitespace indentation for several reasons. Brace-based languages: 1) Generally have the "dangling else" set of ambiguities. 2) Some (e.g. C) allow but do not require braces which leads to styl…

Chris,

Ha! I love your reply. Thank you.

I know you care about language design. As I said more or less, that's self-evident, and I'm sorry for taking your whitespace comments too literally. You're the source, after all, not me, so accept my apologies there. It's misinterpretation, but not meant to be a misrepresentation. :-)

My comment wasn't meant to be critical of you. Honestly, as a pretty famous engineer, it never even crossed my mind you might read my message. As I said, I know you have to deal with reality to accomplish your goal, and that reality existed before you showed up to take on the challenge.

Thank you for all your contributions and good luck on Mojo.

Chris

Re: Mojo is available for local download

#138

Post by ddragon »

zogrodea wrote: post #131
ddragon wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be simplifying too much. There are a lot of external factors for something being popular, like timing, luck, support from big enterprises and leading colleges, inertia and sunk costs. You could argue that does make python better regardless of the language itself but that poster was talking about a hypothetical scenario in which those factors were won by a language better designed for those tasks. Would you…

Richard Feldman states in a video aiming to explain the popularity of OOP that Python initially had a small community for decades, and that Python's increase in popularity followed a slow and steady increase, which is not true of many other languages like Ruby. That's corroborated by the graph in this article. [0] Based on Python's slow and steady incresae, timing and luck don't seem like good factors for explaining…

I fail to see how timing and luck isn't a factor. It's more than how popular it was when it launched, many of those languages that are allegedly better had a strong timing disadvantage by either not existing or not being mature once the data science boom occurred (including equivalents to libraries like numpy, scipy, matplotlib and theano), allowing python to be the right option then. Any language that missed the timing must now play catch up with a fraction of the resources and completely unproven in the market.

Luck is harder to quantify, but at the very least competitors like common lisp didn't have much of it.

Re: Mojo is available for local download

#139

Post by fooker »

DiffProg wrote: post #134
fooker wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is very good, especially if you don't have to rewrite your code. Try to do it yourself (say take a merge sort implementation and try to make it scale), it'll be roughly this much after a few hours of work. Now imagine the compiler is doing this for you.

Keyword is imagine, because with Mojo you do have to write your code in a new language. You cannot use the Python parts if you want speed. That's writing code in a new language.

That's the stated goal, it's not mature technology.

You can have your python parts source compatible with the new language.

Of course they are far off from that.

But not that far off if your python code is typical ML framework consumer code.

Re: Mojo is available for local download

#140

Post by qaq »

mathisfun123 wrote: post #129
samuell wrote: post #61

Hmm, a bit of a rough experience. I had a few lines of python code, to count the fraction of A:s and C:s in a DNA (fasta) file adapted from [1]: with open("chry_multiplied.fa") as infile: a: int = 0 t: int = 0 g: int = 0 c: int = 0 for line in infile: if line[0] != '>' and len(line) != line.count("N") + 1: g += line.count("G") c += line.count("C") a += line.count("A") t += line.count("T") total_base_count = a + t + c…

man two days ago when i said their promise of compatibility with python was startup hype i got no traction. like duh they'll over-promise and underdeliver - it's chapter 1 of every single SV playbook.

Have you looked at the team? This is pretty early in the development
Post reply on HN