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

91–100 of 201 posts

Re: Mojo 1.0

#91

Post by woadwarrior01 »

sgt wrote: post #72
woadwarrior01 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The value has already been materialized. They were acquired by Qualcomm for $3.9 billion.

Wow, so Lattner became a billionaire. Pays to be in compilers.

For once. A former colleague once quipped: The only way to make decent money in the business of language runtimes is to get a job at a big company that depends on it.

Re: Mojo 1.0

#92

Post by syrrim »

ioasuncvinvaer wrote: post #90
syrrim wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would someone make a language where the programmer and the interpreter have two different ways of figuring out where blocks start and end?

at the closing curly?

Programmers look at the indentation.

Re: Mojo 1.0

#93

Post by melodyogonna »

minraws wrote: post #29

> 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. Why not now though? Why wait for 4 more months? What magic is there to hide in just making it source available at least.

My guess is that the compiler will be opened next week at Modcon. Honestly? I'm surprised Mojo 1.0 is being released now; I had thought it would be released at Modcon along with the compiler source code, but oh well, 18th August isn't far now.

Re: Mojo 1.0

#95

Post by usef- »

redlewel wrote: post #19
mort96 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's categorically uninteresting until and unless that happens. Weird to release 1.0 without it. What are they waiting for?

This exactly. Doesn't scream confidence that its still closed upon release.

Why? The creators have a strong open source background and it's work to properly open source.

Re: Mojo 1.0

#96

Post by ktm5j »

mort96 wrote: post #12
my123 wrote: post #7

Earlier 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?

A lot of people beg to differ. And it's their decision, not yours on when to open source. They have their reasons even if they aren't explaining them to you.

Re: Mojo 1.0

#97

Post by usef- »

spprashant wrote: post #78
derbOac wrote: post #76

Is Mojo being a superset of Python still part of its projected feature set? I tried Mojo a bit early on and decided to come back to it when it was more complete, and in the interim I read some comments somewhere that the superset-of-Python part was being walked back from. On https://mojolang.org/docs/roadmap/ it's stated (Phase 3) that "Mojo may or may not evolve into a full superset of Python, and it's okay if it do…

They moved the goalposts. I think the landscape has changed since their initial Python superset pitch. It seems like a deliberate pivot towards creating an AI-era language which make GPU programming as easy as writing Python.

To be fair, translation plays to the strengths of AI, so there's less benefit to being an exact superset.

Re: Mojo 1.0

#98

Post by phoghed »

jibal wrote: post #33
oceansky wrote: post #20

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.

> I guess that's the new normal. Yes, so basing confidence on it is totally bogus. Such comments are cheap and add nothing to the discussion of Mojo reaching 1.0 status.

Finding some unit of the thing one can actually understand and using it to issue a shallow dismissal is canonically the most Hacker News possible comment. And the rest of the commenters generally love it.

Not to worry though, if there’s nothing webshit accessible in the content there’s surely something wrong with the CSS to complain about!

Re: Mojo 1.0

#100

Post by [deleted] »

tyre wrote: post #70
steve1977 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, without significant indentation?

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

[deleted]
Post reply on HN