a systems language that reads like python is great!
python superset would have been perfect.
I do hope the language thrives and gets a community.
All the best to the modular team.
Mojo 1.0
171–180 of 181 posts
Re: Mojo 1.0
#172(A) MOJO should have used rust.
(B) MOJO should should have used Nvidia.
Re: Mojo 1.0
#173Earlier quoted context omitted.
And Mojo will die because nvidia is not interested in maintaining any semblance of backwards compatibility when it comes to CUDA. It's going to be a perpetual race forwards, and whenever nvidia upgrades CUDA, you're going to be stuck there twiddling your thumbs and waiting for Mojo to become compatible. Additionally, anyone who has seen how Swift evolved should be wary of Lattner saying "the language is mostly stable…
It's not true that Nvidia doesn't care about CUDA backwards compatibility. The invention of TileIR was motivated entirely by that problem. GPU architectures are supported by the full tool suites for at least 10 years by CUDA (that's longer than they are for graphics). Nvidia is also a major contributor to MLIR, which they use for TileIR and ClangIR, so should a compatibility break occur it wouldn't be entirely up to…
None of these things are true except the ClangIR thing
Re: Mojo 1.0
#174Re: Mojo 1.0
#175first impression based on the hero image is that this is a new model for image or video generation!
Re: Mojo 1.0
#176Earlier quoted context omitted.
You missed the point. I’m well aware python has formatters, I use them and implemented my own. The point was that when generating/manipulating python code you cannot just generate in whatever format then run a formatter. you need to carefully keep track of the exact indentation at place where the code in written
Fair. That is a very slight friction on what is quite a small niche, though (compared to the wider ecosystem of developers). And most that need similar will use AST or runtime construction. The trivial kind of raw source generation is still trivial, but I'm guessing you're doing embedding/templates or something?
It’s definitely niche!
Re: Mojo 1.0
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never understood this. What kind of special whitespace requirements do people have?
I like significant invitation, but I still wouldn’t choose it if I was designing a language today. Functional-style programming has become much more popular since Python was designed in the 1990s, and there doesn’t seem to be a good way to have Python-like significant indentation and also support true anonymous functions.
Scala 3, F#, CoffeeScript, Nim, Haskell, Elm, PureScript...
Re: Mojo 1.0
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's categorically uninteresting until and unless that happens. Weird to release 1.0 without it. What are they waiting for?
From listening to Chris Lattner in interviews my guess it’s learning from when Swift became open source. The beta versions of Swift had massive language changes in how value types worked like with Array. Mojo is trying to get this language design locked down first, which is easier to do behind closed doors. A compiler promising source stability is a different commitment than the compiler’s code being ready for outsid…
Massive language changes
are easier to do without users. Whether the source code is visible to external people or not is completely irrelevant. I have a few programming language implementations on my GitHub and let me tell you, making manor breaking cha he's to those are easy as pie when I'm the only user.
If Mojo's goal was to make evolution easier, they would have a limited closed beta like what Jai does. But they're not doing that; they make the toolchain available to everyone, they just did this marketing push around releasing version 1.0 of their language. They're making it harder to make breaking changes by seeking users among the general public.
I have no idea why you started talking about outside contributors though, nobody's arguing that they should accept outside contributions. You do t have to do that. It's a completely orthogonal issue to what we're talking about, which is releasing the code under a FOSS license.
Re: Mojo 1.0
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
I spotted the exact same thing with the AI image. makes the whole thing immediately feel cheap, it's wild
> makes the whole thing immediately feel cheap, it's wild Hard to decide if the blog post is wild, or people's visceral reactions to it. I've said it before: I believe the obsession in trying to figure out if something is AI generated will soon be classified as a mental disorder.
There’s no obsession. It’s an obvious, ugly slop.
Re: Mojo 1.0
#180See their in-depth vision doc here: