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

Hello V-Lang

blog.hackersreboot.tech

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 193 posts

Re: Hello V-Lang

#181

Post by [deleted] »

dundarious wrote: post #169
paskozdilar wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The same argument can be levied at any project that goes for a "don't use full LLVM for debug builds where iteration time and hence compile time speed is paramount" It would be absurd for someone to write a frontend to LLVM then claim that their compiler is as fast as LLVM. V uses TCC - TCC is fast at compilation , not V. V is fast at transpilation , but that's not what the author has claimed. > that you included t…

Does Rust not make claims about performance, even though a large proportion of that comes from LLVM's work? Do Rust or GCC or Clang (or probably even Haskell) use tests as the primary way to ensure/approach correctness? The number of compilers for any language that actually prove correctness and that are used for some practical purpose can probably be counted on one hand (e.g., CompCert), so I'm not going to use that…

[deleted]

Re: Hello V-Lang

#182

Post by bheadmaster »

dundarious wrote: post #169
paskozdilar wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The same argument can be levied at any project that goes for a "don't use full LLVM for debug builds where iteration time and hence compile time speed is paramount" It would be absurd for someone to write a frontend to LLVM then claim that their compiler is as fast as LLVM. V uses TCC - TCC is fast at compilation , not V. V is fast at transpilation , but that's not what the author has claimed. > that you included t…

Does Rust not make claims about performance, even though a large proportion of that comes from LLVM's work? Do Rust or GCC or Clang (or probably even Haskell) use tests as the primary way to ensure/approach correctness? The number of compilers for any language that actually prove correctness and that are used for some practical purpose can probably be counted on one hand (e.g., CompCert), so I'm not going to use that…

It's trivial to have fast compilation speed if all you do is transpile to C (naively, i.e. without any program analysis) and use TCC to compile the C (again, naively, that's why it's so fast). Such "languages" are often written as CS homework assignments.

But even with the transpilation step, the V transpiler is still unable to output correct code on trivial examples, demonstrated in other comments. The fact that you have thousands of tests (Alex's words) and the trivial examples still fail, makes me completely sure that something about the whole approach is fundamentally wrong; which lead me to the "testing whether your regex parses html properly" comment. Tests are useless if the thing you're testing does not prove anything.

The fact that the author is pushing this unfinished mess as a completed achievement (instead of work in progress), without ever mentioning any downsides (except when presented with undeniable proof, at which point he makes up another justification for the issue), only shows the author's inexperience and disconnection from the community. V compiler is a toy project wrapped up in a pretty box to look like something serious. And when faced with criticism, Alex seems to turn to his three different accounts to argue with the commenters, instead of reading the damn Dragon Book and fixing his damn compiler.

To me, personally, V language is the perfect example of an overhyped griftwork.

Re: Hello V-Lang

#183

Post by [deleted] »

amedvednikov wrote: post #117
Normille wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, for a start there's the "Translating DOOM from C to V and building it in 0.7 seconds" which is still on your front page. In spite of being a 'WIP' for as long as I can remember. Then there's; vweb, vorum, volt and ved [all of which feature prominently on the front page too] which have been little more than alpha quality proofs of concept for a similarly long time. Don't get me wrong; I was actually interested i…

vweb, volt, and ved are not a "little more than alpha" yes, the os is being developed in V, and it can already run bash, GCC, G++, and Doom. https://github.com/vlang/vinix the person working on it, is an osdev, and not a compiler developer

[deleted]

Re: Hello V-Lang

#184

Post by bheadmaster »

hackersreboot wrote: post #168

Hey Guys, So I am the author of the article and it is about time I address the comments here. I just want to say that I just got to know about it, I used it and it felt good. I tested a lot of the features but ofc couldn't get them all. I know nothing of any controversies surrounding the language. Also, I am just starting out in writing so I might've not included some details or it might've looked like a "sales talk"…

If I may offer a suggestion:

Focus on what information you're trying to convey and try to say it in the minimum amount of words. Prefer sentences that convey information ("V is has a 10MB compiler" - we learned the size of V compiler) to sentences that don't ("V-lang is an extraordinarily powerful language that can help you create a variety of applications" - we learned nothing, since "powerful" is subjective, and all languages can be used to write applications). That will help you focus on communicating your ideas clearly and tersely, which will make your articles much more attractive to technical readers.

Good luck with your research and writing!

Re: Hello V-Lang

#185

Post by amedvednikov »

bheadmaster wrote: post #182
dundarious wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Rust not make claims about performance, even though a large proportion of that comes from LLVM's work? Do Rust or GCC or Clang (or probably even Haskell) use tests as the primary way to ensure/approach correctness? The number of compilers for any language that actually prove correctness and that are used for some practical purpose can probably be counted on one hand (e.g., CompCert), so I'm not going to use that…

It's trivial to have fast compilation speed if all you do is transpile to C (naively, i.e. without any program analysis) and use TCC to compile the C (again, naively, that's why it's so fast). Such "languages" are often written as CS homework assignments. But even with the transpilation step, the V transpiler is still unable to output correct code on trivial examples, demonstrated in other comments. The fact that you…

Can you link to those trivial examples demonstrated in other comments?

Re: Hello V-Lang

#186

Post by bheadmaster »

amedvednikov wrote: post #185
bheadmaster wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's trivial to have fast compilation speed if all you do is transpile to C (naively, i.e. without any program analysis) and use TCC to compile the C (again, naively, that's why it's so fast). Such "languages" are often written as CS homework assignments. But even with the transpilation step, the V transpiler is still unable to output correct code on trivial examples, demonstrated in other comments. The fact that you…

Can you link to those trivial examples demonstrated in other comments?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31063731

Re: Hello V-Lang

#187

Post by Tozen »

super_flanker wrote: post #177
vlang1dot0 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason V is so controversial is that it separates nearly everyone who looks at it into two diametrically opposed groups: those who have some experience or knowledge of programming language design and implementation and those who do not. The first group are generally the "detractors" and view every concession made to the impossible set of features as a reinforcement of their belief that the language cannot work as…

Thanks for taking time and explaining things around v's state of affairs. Also I'd like to add that V's first feature, "no null" is a myth. V supports initializing a reference with 0, which is null/nil or whatever you call it. I'm pretty sure v's author will not bother responding to a well laid out facts.

Actually, V's author was gracious enough to come to HN to address and answer a number of users (including on this thread). This includes that he has previously answered questions by vlang1dot0 (on other threads), despite repeated attempts at spreading misinformation or the obvious and continual trolling (with just the username alone).

If you notice, HN doesn't have zig1dot0, nim1dot0, or odin1dot0 accounts trolling any threads they can find pertaining to the language or alluding to why they aren't at 1.0 yet. Despite the fact that both Zig and Odin started around 2016 (3 or more years before Vlang) and have yet to achieve 1.0. Zig only managed self-hosting this year (2022), after more than 6 years of existence. Nim took 11 years to reach 1.0 (created 2008 to achieved 1.0 in 2019).

Add to this, the incessant and demonstrably false claims that V is vaporware or fake despite it having over 90 releases, applications written in it, and thorough documentation about the language.

https://github.com/vlang/v/releases (releases) https://github.com/vlang/v/blob/master/doc/docs.md (documentation) https://modules.vlang.io/ (modules)

By the way, types in V are zeroed by default. Zeroed means that they are assigned default values. Empty string for string types, 0 for integers, and false for Boolean types. When not sure what to initialize variables with, it is recommended to make them mutable, so to be updated as needed. In V, you don't assign null or nil. There isn't any *ptr = NULL or Var := nil. That is the context in which they are referring to.

Re: Hello V-Lang

#188

Post by paskozdilar »

EdSchouten wrote: post #122
jokethrowaway wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a communication problem. Looking at the homepage and the projects it feels like everything is ready and, if the claims were true, it would be the most ground breaking language of the last decades. When you go to look at the code or try to run something you find out: - some things are still closed source - some are broken - some are wins from C It's a great strategy for collecting a check from VCs and I wish the…

As I can't respond to amedvednikov's comment below, let me respond to it through yours (sorry): > No things are closed source. Never have been. That's not correct. I seem to remember that when V was released initially, the compiler was available for download in binary form only. The source code was only released later on.

Note that, in most cases, you can't respond to a comment because it's been posted too recently. I think it's a mechanism to prevent flaming.

Re: Hello V-Lang

#189

Post by hackersreboot »

bheadmaster wrote: post #184
hackersreboot wrote: post #168

Hey Guys, So I am the author of the article and it is about time I address the comments here. I just want to say that I just got to know about it, I used it and it felt good. I tested a lot of the features but ofc couldn't get them all. I know nothing of any controversies surrounding the language. Also, I am just starting out in writing so I might've not included some details or it might've looked like a "sales talk"…

If I may offer a suggestion: Focus on what information you're trying to convey and try to say it in the minimum amount of words. Prefer sentences that convey information ("V is has a 10MB compiler" - we learned the size of V compiler) to sentences that don't ("V-lang is an extraordinarily powerful language that can help you create a variety of applications" - we learned nothing, since "powerful" is subjective, and al…

Thanks for the tip! Will use it.

Re: Hello V-Lang

#190

Post by dundarious »

bheadmaster wrote: post #182
dundarious wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does Rust not make claims about performance, even though a large proportion of that comes from LLVM's work? Do Rust or GCC or Clang (or probably even Haskell) use tests as the primary way to ensure/approach correctness? The number of compilers for any language that actually prove correctness and that are used for some practical purpose can probably be counted on one hand (e.g., CompCert), so I'm not going to use that…

It's trivial to have fast compilation speed if all you do is transpile to C (naively, i.e. without any program analysis) and use TCC to compile the C (again, naively, that's why it's so fast). Such "languages" are often written as CS homework assignments. But even with the transpilation step, the V transpiler is still unable to output correct code on trivial examples, demonstrated in other comments. The fact that you…

It may be easier to have a C backend that is compiled via tcc, but if it's a smart choice (for the tradeoffs of a debug build), and hardly anybody else is doing it, then it's positive and noteworthy. The fact that it may not be particularly difficult is irrelevant.

I can't assess the quality of V in general, and it may be lacking for my needs, but I know a lot of early stage language projects with a lot of trivial bug reports (I've filed a few), that are still engineering accomplishments capable of real usage. V seems to be in that league. Maybe it's near the bottom of that league, but you can just state that and leave it at that.

Maybe V has a bit of a "dirty main branch" approach, where other languages you're used to tend to instead have long-lasting branches for the work-in-progress stuff. I can see how that would be annoying, being able to use half-finished functionality, and I might not like it myself. Maybe the author claims features are further ahead than they really are -- that would be even more frustrating. But your criticisms are hyperbolic (denigrating the work as at the level of a CS homework assignment, and comparing it to almost entirely non-existent languages that are mathematically provably correct) and often seem vindictive (unlikely to be leveled at other highly analogous early days language projects). Any legitimate criticisms you have are lost in the vitriol.

Post reply on HN