3 ms·

You’re almost certainly being downvoted in the first case for having snarked about somebody taking their own time for their own project. How fast you could do i

by akerl_ 5y ago

You’re almost certainly being downvoted in the first case for having snarked about somebody taking their own time for their own project. How fast you could do it isn’t really relevant, so it’s just a pointless dig. And then in the second case because the rules ask you to meta-converse about downvotes

zabzonk 5y ago
Where snark? I asked a question - is that not allowed here?
- akerl_ 5y ago
  > Also, you should be able to create a new language in less than two years This is the snark.
  - zabzonk 5y ago
    But you should!
    - turminal 5y ago
      Why isn't Zig done yet then? Or Rust?
      - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
        create not done. I can go to the websites of those, download the stable release, read tutorials and then use them for actual work, surely? (Whether I should is another matter)
        renox 5y ago
        Given that Zig hasn't reached 1.0 yet, I'd say that no you cannot download a 'stable release' of Zig. AFAIK the main reason for that is because AK wants to have a fast (debug) compiler before reaching 1.0 and that Zig isn't just a thin layer above C mainly due to its compile time feature, unsigned overflow being UB in Zig is another.
    - akerl_ 5y ago
      Imagine your friend says “I’ve been working on this painting for a year”. You can say “That’s a lot of dedication, you must be really into this project” or “you should be able to paint faster than that.” One of these is the right and answer and the other is wrong. HN doesn’t require that you hype up every poster, but if you’re going to minimize their efforts we instead ask you to just not submit that comment.
    - tinco 5y ago
      Javascript was created in 2 weeks. It then took two decades to become nearly tolerable to use. That it would cost 2 years to make a language is an absolutely arbitrary amount of time. Most great languages took significantly longer than that to become truly great.

by akerl_ 5y ago

zabzonk 5y ago

Where snark? I asked a question - is that not allowed here?

akerl_ 5y ago
> Also, you should be able to create a new language in less than two years This is the snark.
- zabzonk 5y ago
  But you should!
  - turminal 5y ago
    Why isn't Zig done yet then? Or Rust?
    - unfocussed_mike 5y ago
      create not done. I can go to the websites of those, download the stable release, read tutorials and then use them for actual work, surely? (Whether I should is another matter)
      - renox 5y ago
        Given that Zig hasn't reached 1.0 yet, I'd say that no you cannot download a 'stable release' of Zig. AFAIK the main reason for that is because AK wants to have a fast (debug) compiler before reaching 1.0 and that Zig isn't just a thin layer above C mainly due to its compile time feature, unsigned overflow being UB in Zig is another.
  - akerl_ 5y ago
    Imagine your friend says “I’ve been working on this painting for a year”. You can say “That’s a lot of dedication, you must be really into this project” or “you should be able to paint faster than that.” One of these is the right and answer and the other is wrong. HN doesn’t require that you hype up every poster, but if you’re going to minimize their efforts we instead ask you to just not submit that comment.
  - tinco 5y ago
    Javascript was created in 2 weeks. It then took two decades to become nearly tolerable to use. That it would cost 2 years to make a language is an absolutely arbitrary amount of time. Most great languages took significantly longer than that to become truly great.