3 ms·
In case the author ever reads this: assuming good faith, the effort and intent is laudable, but you've put the cart in front of the horse by having multiple ama
by estebank 7y ago
In case the author ever reads this: assuming good faith, the effort and intent is laudable, but you've put the cart in front of the horse by having multiple amazing claims that would take many, many man/years to accomplish by experienced developers, which is why they've been received with a lot of skepticism. Even assuming a great level of skill, the claims a priori are hard to take serious, even before taking into consideration the timeline. Now that (part of?) the code has been released, it seems to be little more than a transpiler from V to C, with allowed inlined C, with most advertised features stubbed out. Had you been claiming "this is my target, very much in progress", then the response to them would be less adversarial and more in the line of "there are multiple reasons all of these targets are not necessarily attainable simultaneously". Had you done that, your Patreon would also likely not have a monthly ~1000 USD support either, which is a big part of why you are in the receiving end of online backlash.
I want to imagine that you just got way over your head, underestimating the effort needed to accomplish all of your goals, but at some point it takes a bit of naiveté to think that well-funded teams in other languages haven't tried to fulfill some of your goals before. I'm very much intrigued by the "Space required/Build time" table, particularly how you think the comparison makes sense or is fair in any way, as you're comparing compilers for established languages with extensive standard libraries, implemented and battle tested features and a decades of man/year effort to your solo project.
Looking at the project it is really hard to come away with an opinion that isn't one of "this is a joke", "this is fraudulent" or "this is a well intentioned inexperienced developer that has no idea how high the target they've set for themselves is". I hope that if it is the latter.
- high_derivative 7y agoWould you have some links to the backlash? Where are these discussions on his language taking place?
- tluyben2 7y agoOn Reddit and here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20229632 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20229632
- estebank 7y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20229632 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20229632 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19610971 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19610971 https://github.com/vlang/v/issues/319 https://github.com/vlang/v/issues/319 (issues are being deleted https://mobile.twitter.com/boy_edgey/status/1142507034446876673 https://mobile.twitter.com/boy_edgey/status/1142507034446876... ) https://www.reddit.com/r/programmingcirclejerk/comments/c3t3wz/v_language_was_just_released_theres_a_issue_in/ https://www.reddit.com/r/programmingcirclejerk/comments/c3t3... Searching on twitter you'll find some light roasting.
- dom96 7y ago> Now that (part of?) the code has been released, it seems to be little more than a transpiler from V to C, with allowed inlined C, with most advertised features stubbed out. This is a little off-topic but I feel it needs to be discussed. The term "transpiler" that you've used here is a little belittling, not only to V but to other languages which are translated to C. I don't think its fair nor accurate to characterize compilers which translate code to C as "transpilers". It's valid when languages of the same level of abstraction are translated to each other, but not when one language (C) is low-level and the other is high-level. All this being said though, V does seem to lean very heavily on inlined C inside its standard library and compiler. So that assessment is totally fair.
- NikkiA 7y agoGiven that the claim was that V was a native code generator with the option for transpiling to C, I think that pointing out that it's only a transpiler is fair
- ScottFree 7y ago> V does seem to lean very heavily on inlined C inside its standard library and compiler. So that assessment is totally fair. If you don't mind me asking, how heavily did Nim rely on inlined C inside it's standard library and compiler when it was only 3 months old? Or did you guys do something different that early in it's development?
- dom96 7y agoI wasn't around back then. But as far as I know there was never much inline C used, many C functions were wrapped sure, but that's necessary to use POSIX/WinAPIs. Nim has always had a "everything should be implemented in pure Nim" philosophy. So much so that the stdlib is even separated into "pure" modules[1] (implemented in Nim completely) and "impure" modules (those that depend on external C/C++ libs). Nowadays major things are implemented in Nim, for example we don't use libuv/libevent but instead have written our own epoll/kqueue/IOCP implementation. 1 - https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim/tree/devel/lib/pure https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim/tree/devel/lib/pure
- 7y ago
- ryuukk_ 7y agowhy you are so jealous lol
- coldtea 7y agoNote how your comment is juvenile and doesn't add anything to the discussion, being a personal attack to boot...
- kamaal 7y ago>>Now that (part of?) the code has been released, it seems to be little more than a transpiler from V to C, with allowed inlined C, with most advertised features stubbed out. >>Looking at the project it is really hard to come away with an opinion that isn't one of "this is a joke", "this is fraudulent" or "this is a well intentioned inexperienced developer that has no idea how high the target they've set for themselves is". I hope that if it is the latter. You would be very interested in seeing the source code of Perl 1.
- lifthrasiir 7y agoAt least Perl 1 claimed to be a sort of replacement for awk and sed, and it worked great. Also Larry Wall was already known for his patch program even at that time.