6 ms·

Clearly, you haven't looked more deeply. Download and play with it. To familiarize yourself, maybe better to go over: 1) documentation (https://github.com/vla

by Tozen 5y ago

Clearly, you haven't looked more deeply. Download and play with it. To familiarize yourself, maybe better to go over: 1) documentation (https://github.com/vlang/v/blob/master/doc/docs.md https://github.com/vlang/v/blob/master/doc/docs.md) 2) documentation on modules (https://modules.vlang.io/ https://modules.vlang.io/) 3) ebook (https://www.packtpub.com/product/getting-started-with-v-programming/9781839213434 https://www.packtpub.com/product/getting-started-with-v-prog...) 4) Youtube (https://youtu.be/YpSsqRQLd4U https://youtu.be/YpSsqRQLd4U). Vaporware is about something that doesn't exist. V clearly does exist and has a number of developers and contributors working on it. I understand there was some controversy from 2019, and mostly prior to it being open sourced on GitHub. Then some lingering animosity that stayed around in 2019 and a bit of 2020. Well, that's a few years ago, and its 2022 now. better to look at what's going on in the present. Of any controversy these days, seems more about competing languages and their advocates, not liking another "new kid on the block" or wanting to protect their interests. But, such is the usual between programming languages. I'm talking more from the perspective of how various languages are designed for greater convenience, simplicity, and usability.

Zababa 5y ago
I will not download and play around with the language made by people that still keep fake claims on their websites. If V was more honest, I would myself give it an honest try. It isn't. Some other examples of false claims: > V functions are pure by default, meaning that their return values are a function of their arguments only, and their evaluation has no side effects (besides I/O). > This is achieved by a lack of global variables and all function arguments being immutable by default, even when references are passed. But there is nothing preventing you to create side effects. A function making a side effect isn't pure. For example, Wikipedia [1] says that the return value depending only on input variables is necessary, but you also need no side effects. The claim about Option and Result types [2] is also a bit weird. It feels closer to Zig's error handling than to regular Option and Result types. An important part of these types is that they can be replaced by user-made types without losing much, while in V they seem to rely a lot on compiler support. In the comparaison with Go [3], there is a "No GC". On the main page, "Most objects (~90-100%) are freed by V's autofree engine: the compiler inserts necessary free calls automatically during compilation. Remaining small percentage of objects is freed via GC.". "There's also an option to use GC for everything via v -gc boehm.". This is just the beginning. I don't have any trust in the people behind V and will not rely on them for building software. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_function https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_function [2]: https://github.com/vlang/v/blob/master/doc/docs.md#optionresult-types-and-error-handling https://github.com/vlang/v/blob/master/doc/docs.md#optionres... [3]: https://vlang.io/compare#go https://vlang.io/compare#go
- Tozen 5y ago
  I think you are being overly dismissive of a language that you claim to haven't even played with. Go has been in existence since 2009, so has a 10 year developmental head start on V (mid 2019), and not to mention Go having a major player like Google in their back pocket. But, that can be seen as a bit of an disadvantage too, where Google can direct and influence the language to its purposes versus the majority. V is in alpha, and has been making steady progress and changes over the last few years. To get an idea about this, refer to https://github.com/vlang/v/discussions/7610 https://github.com/vlang/v/discussions/7610 or search their feature request history. The developers and contributors had and are clearly having a healthy exchange on what features they believe are best for the language. It's at 0.2.4, and have stated they won't lock in most things until 0.3. Which at their rate of progress (based on their history), looks like that will be this year. Then they are shooting for 1.0 (which is quite fast). Some volatility is expected type behavior for such a relatively young language. Various things are options or "up in the air" versus built-in or might not make the cut for 0.3. Which is understandable. Various people and "angry" supporters of other languages, are acting like everything about V was supposed to be carved in stone and on lock from day 1. Actually, as if the developers were suppose to supply a finished product upon its release on GitHub. That's outrageously unrealistic and bias hostility that appears to show threatened interests. I'm sure they will be updating their website to reflect the state of their language, as necessary. Their users, contributors, and developers understand where they are at.
  - Zababa 5y ago
    You're missing my point. V not being as developped as other languages is perfectly fine, and I have no issues with that. My problem here is one of trust. The people behind the language have made wild claims that are objectively false. That is my issue with it. They have been called out for it multiple times. The first time I discovered V was in 2019, the website still hasn't been updated to reflect the truth. This, to me, is a dealbreaker. I feel like I can't trust the people behind this language. This is more important for me than the technical merits or lack of of the language. > Some volatility is expected type behavior for such a relatively young language. Various things are options or "up in the air" versus built-in or might not make the cut for 0.3. Which is understandable. It is understandable, what I'm asking them is to be clear and honest about that. > Various people and "angry" supporters of other languages, are acting like everything about V was supposed to be carved in stone and on lock from day 1. Actually, as if the developers were suppose to supply a finished product upon its release on GitHub. That's outrageously unrealistic and bias hostility that appears to show threatened interests. I think you're being a bit too paranoid here. The vast majority of new languages fail without anyone trying to make them fail. Especially these days in the "C/C++ replacement" niche. There's at least Ada, Rust, D, Zig, Go, Nim, Odin, Myrddin, ATS, Swift. There are probably way more than I forgot. > I'm sure they will be updating their website to reflect the state of their language, as necessary. What makes you so sure? They haven't been doing it in the last 3 years. I think you're the one showing pro-V biais here in the face of objective evidence. > Their users, contributors, and developers understand where they are at. But they still show something else to everyone. This is my issue, a lack of clarity, honesty ; thus creating a lack of trust for me.

by Tozen 5y ago

Zababa 5y ago

I will not download and play around with the language made by people that still keep fake claims on their websites. If V was more honest, I would myself give it an honest try. It isn't. Some other examples of false claims: > V functions are pure by default, meaning that their return values are a function of their arguments only, and their evaluation has no side effects (besides I/O). > This is achieved by a lack of global variables and all function arguments being immutable by default, even when references are passed. But there is nothing preventing you to create side effects. A function making a side effect isn't pure. For example, Wikipedia [1] says that the return value depending only on input variables is necessary, but you also need no side effects. The claim about Option and Result types [2] is also a bit weird. It feels closer to Zig's error handling than to regular Option and Result types. An important part of these types is that they can be replaced by user-made types without losing much, while in V they seem to rely a lot on compiler support. In the comparaison with Go [3], there is a "No GC". On the main page, "Most objects (~90-100%) are freed by V's autofree engine: the compiler inserts necessary free calls automatically during compilation. Remaining small percentage of objects is freed via GC.". "There's also an option to use GC for everything via v -gc boehm.". This is just the beginning. I don't have any trust in the people behind V and will not rely on them for building software. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_function https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_function [2]: https://github.com/vlang/v/blob/master/doc/docs.md#optionresult-types-and-error-handling https://github.com/vlang/v/blob/master/doc/docs.md#optionres... [3]: https://vlang.io/compare#go https://vlang.io/compare#go

Tozen 5y ago
I think you are being overly dismissive of a language that you claim to haven't even played with. Go has been in existence since 2009, so has a 10 year developmental head start on V (mid 2019), and not to mention Go having a major player like Google in their back pocket. But, that can be seen as a bit of an disadvantage too, where Google can direct and influence the language to its purposes versus the majority. V is in alpha, and has been making steady progress and changes over the last few years. To get an idea about this, refer to https://github.com/vlang/v/discussions/7610 https://github.com/vlang/v/discussions/7610 or search their feature request history. The developers and contributors had and are clearly having a healthy exchange on what features they believe are best for the language. It's at 0.2.4, and have stated they won't lock in most things until 0.3. Which at their rate of progress (based on their history), looks like that will be this year. Then they are shooting for 1.0 (which is quite fast). Some volatility is expected type behavior for such a relatively young language. Various things are options or "up in the air" versus built-in or might not make the cut for 0.3. Which is understandable. Various people and "angry" supporters of other languages, are acting like everything about V was supposed to be carved in stone and on lock from day 1. Actually, as if the developers were suppose to supply a finished product upon its release on GitHub. That's outrageously unrealistic and bias hostility that appears to show threatened interests. I'm sure they will be updating their website to reflect the state of their language, as necessary. Their users, contributors, and developers understand where they are at.
- Zababa 5y ago
  You're missing my point. V not being as developped as other languages is perfectly fine, and I have no issues with that. My problem here is one of trust. The people behind the language have made wild claims that are objectively false. That is my issue with it. They have been called out for it multiple times. The first time I discovered V was in 2019, the website still hasn't been updated to reflect the truth. This, to me, is a dealbreaker. I feel like I can't trust the people behind this language. This is more important for me than the technical merits or lack of of the language. > Some volatility is expected type behavior for such a relatively young language. Various things are options or "up in the air" versus built-in or might not make the cut for 0.3. Which is understandable. It is understandable, what I'm asking them is to be clear and honest about that. > Various people and "angry" supporters of other languages, are acting like everything about V was supposed to be carved in stone and on lock from day 1. Actually, as if the developers were suppose to supply a finished product upon its release on GitHub. That's outrageously unrealistic and bias hostility that appears to show threatened interests. I think you're being a bit too paranoid here. The vast majority of new languages fail without anyone trying to make them fail. Especially these days in the "C/C++ replacement" niche. There's at least Ada, Rust, D, Zig, Go, Nim, Odin, Myrddin, ATS, Swift. There are probably way more than I forgot. > I'm sure they will be updating their website to reflect the state of their language, as necessary. What makes you so sure? They haven't been doing it in the last 3 years. I think you're the one showing pro-V biais here in the face of objective evidence. > Their users, contributors, and developers understand where they are at. But they still show something else to everyone. This is my issue, a lack of clarity, honesty ; thus creating a lack of trust for me.