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

Mojo 1.0

modular.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 216 posts

Re: Mojo 1.0

#61

Post by cpeterso »

totalperspectiv wrote: post #58
swiftcoder wrote: post #39

I feel like this language would really benefit from some sort of 1-pager overview. I just spent a fair bit of time on the official site, and I still don't think I have a very good grasp of what problem this language aims to solve, or why I would select it over other similar languages

Having written a lot of Mojo over the last two year, just for fun, it's a really cool language. Ownership model adjacent to Rust, comptime in the realm of Zig, rich type system, first class SIMD support, etc. Performance wise it's the first language in long time that isn't just an LLVM wrapper. LLVM is still involved, but they are using it differently than say, Rust or Zig. Very excited for Mojo once it's open source…

> LLVM is still involved, but they are using it differently than say, Rust or Zig.

Chris Lattner said in a Developer Voices podcast interview:

"Swift in a way was syntactic sugar for LLVM, at the very bottom of the stack it could talk directly to LLVM primitives. Mojo does basically that same trick, but it supercharges it by moving to this MLIR world."

Re: Mojo 1.0

#62

Post by ainch »

tfrancisl wrote: post #5
mono442 wrote: post #4

Creating a new language in the age of AI seems kind of pointless. I don't write code by hand anymore, I only review it and I prefer it to be in a language which I already know since investing time in learning another language doesn't make sense at this point.

this language predates the rise of "AI" (you probably mean harnessed LLMs, but I'll forgive you) by several years. This is the 1.0 release.

Does it? Mojo was announced 6 months after ChatGPT was released.

Re: Mojo 1.0

#63

Post by phoghed »

andy99 wrote: post #40
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't Mojo expressly for building AI frameworks? It isn't really needed or special as a language by-itself. It's main purpose is to make it easier to program these high end graphics cards for AI. So maybe an AI image isn't the worst.

People who work with AI all the time should be the most finely tuned in to how sloppy it looks and when to use it and when not.

[flagged]

Re: Mojo 1.0

#64

Post by jhatemyjob »

mono442 wrote: post #4

Creating a new language in the age of AI seems kind of pointless. I don't write code by hand anymore, I only review it and I prefer it to be in a language which I already know since investing time in learning another language doesn't make sense at this point.

Sounds like you're just lazy. Which is fine. You'll probably have a okay career. But not a great one.

Re: Mojo 1.0

#65

Post by Conscat »

well_ackshually wrote: post #45
nylonstrung wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know CUDA or Triton? The point of Mojo was to replace GPU kernel programming langs with a Pythonic one that was more familiar

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 Mojo to fix it.

Re: Mojo 1.0

#66

Post by nu11ptr »

totalperspectiv wrote: post #58
swiftcoder wrote: post #39

I feel like this language would really benefit from some sort of 1-pager overview. I just spent a fair bit of time on the official site, and I still don't think I have a very good grasp of what problem this language aims to solve, or why I would select it over other similar languages

Having written a lot of Mojo over the last two year, just for fun, it's a really cool language. Ownership model adjacent to Rust, comptime in the realm of Zig, rich type system, first class SIMD support, etc. Performance wise it's the first language in long time that isn't just an LLVM wrapper. LLVM is still involved, but they are using it differently than say, Rust or Zig. Very excited for Mojo once it's open source…

How are compile times compared to Rust? Zig? Go?

Re: Mojo 1.0

#67

Post by sph »

fwip wrote: post #30
redlewel wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I believe Mojo has been primarily using AI-generated imagery of its mascot for several years now, which politically aligns with its pivot to being a language for AI development.

A lot of fancy words to say this is slop.

Re: Mojo 1.0

#68

Post by afdbcreid »

totalperspectiv wrote: post #58
swiftcoder wrote: post #39

I feel like this language would really benefit from some sort of 1-pager overview. I just spent a fair bit of time on the official site, and I still don't think I have a very good grasp of what problem this language aims to solve, or why I would select it over other similar languages

Having written a lot of Mojo over the last two year, just for fun, it's a really cool language. Ownership model adjacent to Rust, comptime in the realm of Zig, rich type system, first class SIMD support, etc. Performance wise it's the first language in long time that isn't just an LLVM wrapper. LLVM is still involved, but they are using it differently than say, Rust or Zig. Very excited for Mojo once it's open source…

> Performance wise it's the first language in long time that isn't just an LLVM wrapper

Why? Because it uses MLIR? Rust has its own MIR, it's even more not-LLVM-wrapper.

Re: Mojo 1.0

#69

Post by netdur »

r_lee wrote: post #55

the 1.0 release of Mojo, it's a pretty big event, of course first thing I'm greeted with is an AI slop image on the top of the blog post awesome

like finding a rock of gold underground and tossing it away because it’s dirty?

Re: Mojo 1.0

#70

Post by tyre »

steve1977 wrote: post #53
manojlds wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Python, but good.

So, without significant indentation?

Oh nooooo, they fucked it up too. Why would someone make a language that’s whitespace sensitive? It’s confounding.
Post reply on HN