AI generated first image does not give me much confidence. Lastest OpenCV 5 release notes also had a lot of LLMisms. I guess that's the new normal. Still, I am very hopeful for Mojo.
Mojo 1.0
21–30 of 172 posts
Re: Mojo 1.0
#22Don't see the value of using a language with a closed source compiler... Much better options out there. Python already has libraries like Pydantic that offload performance to functions written in Rust under the hood.
C and C++ were closed source for quite some time, they still are in places like commercial embedded OSes and console dev kits, even when they happen to be GCC and clang forks nowadays. Clang actually has replaced most GCC forks exactly because vendors can keep the fork closed source.
Re: Mojo 1.0
#23The main downside is that usually I only choose languages that the LLM is extremely good at. (however I avoid dynamically typed). But I hope they succeed, it's a very interesting approach. Then I will jump on it later on. S
Re: Mojo 1.0
#24Interesting. Heard about Mojo a few years now, never really tried it. My Python brain cannot really write C++ or Rust but still need the performance.
You may have heard of it already, but Nim has existed in this space for some time.
Re: Mojo 1.0
#25AI generated first image does not give me much confidence. Lastest OpenCV 5 release notes also had a lot of LLMisms. I guess that's the new normal. Still, I am very hopeful for Mojo.
Re: Mojo 1.0
#26AI generated first image does not give me much confidence. Lastest OpenCV 5 release notes also had a lot of LLMisms. I guess that's the new normal. Still, I am very hopeful for Mojo.
Did they think that image would make them look fun or interesting? Because it's exactly the opposite.
Re: Mojo 1.0
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
C and C++ were closed source for quite some time, they still are in places like commercial embedded OSes and console dev kits, even when they happen to be GCC and clang forks nowadays. Clang actually has replaced most GCC forks exactly because vendors can keep the fork closed source.
Sure but at those times C and C++ had no immediate replacement, and if you were doing embedded C/C++ was your only option. The same cannot be said for Mojo.
Re: Mojo 1.0
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Finally, we will continue to progressively open-source more of the Mojo language, as well as components in MAX that we have built with it. Our commitment remains unchanged – we will open source the Mojo compiler and toolchain in 2026.
It's categorically uninteresting until and unless that happens. Weird to release 1.0 without it. What are they waiting for?
Re: Mojo 1.0
#29Why not now though? Why wait for 4 more months? What magic is there to hide in just making it source available at least.
Re: Mojo 1.0
#30AI generated first image does not give me much confidence. Lastest OpenCV 5 release notes also had a lot of LLMisms. I guess that's the new normal. Still, I am very hopeful for Mojo.
I know right? Would be better to have a banner with the language logo than some totally out of place aislop image, almost makes you think this is a random person's blog and not the official Mojo site