3 ms·

I'm working on a language with similar goals, but with the focus on simplicity: https://vlang.io https://vlang.io A relatively stable 0.2 release will be out

• oconnor663 7y ago
  I'm curious about the example code at https://vlang.io/compare https://vlang.io/compare (apologies if you answered this before): - Does the compiler use escape analysis to determine that the `cursor` variable needs to be heap allocated? If not, how does it know that the worker threads won't outlive the stack frame that owns `cursor`? If so, when does the allocation get freed? And does implicit heap allocation conflict with the goal of being as fast as C? - How does the compiler know that the `lock` block is the only code that touches `cursor`? Does it still work if the `lock` block is in a subroutine? Does that require whole-program analysis? If two different `lock` blocks touch the same variable, are they implicitly a single `lock`?
  • kbd 7y ago
    The two languages I'd be most interested in seeing added to that comparison are Nim and Zig. Those definitely have most of my mindshare on "new low-level/efficient languages simpler than Rust".
• kzrdude 7y ago
  Sounds very interesting. I guess you should compare compile speeds with D and Nim, since they are also interested in fast build times.
• koszikm 7y ago
  It looks nice, but I'd add to the comparison table that Erlang has both hot code reloading and no global state.
• digikata 7y ago
  Are you trying to do data lifetime analysis in V? I don't see that listed and to me it's pretty much Rust's key feature to enabling a high degree of memory leak and multithreading safety.
• ConsoleTVs 7y ago
  https://christine.website/blog/v-vaporware-2019-06-23 https://christine.website/blog/v-vaporware-2019-06-23