17 ms·

What I’m missing are comparisons. A few examples illustrating what makes Hare preferable when compared to C/Rust/Zig.

by runeks 4y ago

ddevault 4y ago
I really want to avoid measuring Hare up against other languages. I think it stands on its own merits, and would prefer that people evaluate it in earnest rather than compare bullet points with another language. Nevertheless, there does exist a (dated) comparison with C: https://harelang.org/blog/2021-02-09-hare-advances-on-c/ https://harelang.org/blog/2021-02-09-hare-advances-on-c/ And if you have any specific questions that you want to frame in the context of another language, I will do my best to answer them.
- twh270 4y ago
  If you want people to evaluate it on its own merits, then make those merits stand out. As it stands, your intro paragraph ("Hare is a systems programming language...") is so generic that it doesn't tell me why I might want to use it instead of C or Zig or assembly. Where does it excel? What makes it stand out? Bullet points help me quickly decide whether I want to spend time evaluating a language.
- runeks 4y ago
  > I think it stands on its own merits, and would prefer that people evaluate it in earnest rather than compare bullet points with another language. I’m definitely not looking for bullet point comparisons. Rather, I’m looking for an example of implementing some concrete functionality in both Hare and — say — C, which highlights the advantages of Hare over C in implementing this specific functionality.
capableweb 4y ago
Every language would do us (programmers) a great favor by having a page titled "Pro & Cons" or even "When to use X / When not to use X", and could include comparing other languages as well. Maybe it's hard to sell your language if you have to include cons/when not to use X as well, but it'll help gain trust for sure. In the case of Hare, it doesn't seem to be good if you want to be able to have anything running on Windows/macOS, as one stated goal is "Hare does not, and will not, support any proprietary operating systems" according to https://harelang.org/platforms/ https://harelang.org/platforms/, which makes it very unattractive for me at least, as I move across three platforms daily.
- AaronM 4y ago
  How do they expect to gain traction if they refuse to support 2 of the three platforms software is developed for?
  - capableweb 4y ago
    In Hare's defense, not every programming language needs to target every runtime/OS/environment. JavaScript only targets the browser. Shaders usually targets one graphic runtime. Maybe there is a space for a language that just targets a few OSes, or even just one? Remember that both C# and Swift initially just targeted one platform, so maybe it does makes sense to now have one OSS language for OSS nerds.
    - signaleleven 4y ago
      While that was true for years, Node.js has made JavaScript viable on the server for quite a while. But I agree with your overall point. I think JS and C# are good examples of languages that were seen as valuable enough to start using in other environments. I love C#.
  - kragen 4y ago
    Well, naturally, with people who use the other one: Arduino. I mean FreeBSD. Or maybe FreeRTOS? Wait, Android. Or NetBSD. Or Wasm. Or JS. Or the JVM. Or the .NET CIL. Or ReactOS. Or SerenityOS. Or FreeDOS. Or Illumos. Or OpenSolaris, heh. Or just regular old GNU/Linux like 70% of the Web. But either Android installs or FreeRTOS installs easily outnumber those.
pedrolucasp 4y ago
Why do you need comparisons. Why can't you just experiment with it and use it if you want to?
- tomrod 4y ago
  Time has value. If the prospect isn't clear, the tradeoff of time to investigate is a waste. People are risk averse and want to understand the benefits the language was designed for relative to competing languages.
  - newaccount2021 4y ago
- cinntaile 4y ago
  To make our lives easier. There is only so much time in a day and we would rather spend it well.
- mikepurvis 4y ago
  The sibling comment already says most of it, but the non-presence of a succinct comparison table is IMO a signal in itself that the language/project is a toy and not ready to be considered for production use.
  - mattgreenrocks 4y ago
    I'm not sure I've seen such a thing for most languages, but maybe I'm used to just reading what a lang is about and mentally slotting it for certain things by myself. I bucket things by static/dynamic types, dominant paradigm, syntax style, GC/no GC, and stated goals, which include what it was designed for. Most of those are easy to discover.
    - mikepurvis 4y ago
      Oh absolutely, and that makes sense if the language is being pitched to individuals. But as soon as you want to convince your boss to let you use it for a project, that executive summary level info is essential. They (rightfully) do not have the time to infer it or "play around", they need a clear "it's X but better because Y, Z."

What I’m missing are comparisons. A few examples illustrating what makes Hare preferable when compared to C/Rust/Zig.

by runeks 4y ago

What I’m missing are comparisons. A few examples illustrating what makes Hare preferable when compared to C/Rust/Zig.

I really want to avoid measuring Hare up against other languages. I think it stands on its own merits, and would prefer that people evaluate it in earnest rather than compare bullet points with another language. Nevertheless, there does exist a (dated) comparison with C: https://harelang.org/blog/2021-02-09-hare-advances-on-c/ https://harelang.org/blog/2021-02-09-hare-advances-on-c/ And if you have any specific questions that you want to frame in the context of another language, I will do my best to answer them.

twh270 4y ago
If you want people to evaluate it on its own merits, then make those merits stand out. As it stands, your intro paragraph ("Hare is a systems programming language...") is so generic that it doesn't tell me why I might want to use it instead of C or Zig or assembly. Where does it excel? What makes it stand out? Bullet points help me quickly decide whether I want to spend time evaluating a language.
runeks 4y ago
> I think it stands on its own merits, and would prefer that people evaluate it in earnest rather than compare bullet points with another language. I’m definitely not looking for bullet point comparisons. Rather, I’m looking for an example of implementing some concrete functionality in both Hare and — say — C, which highlights the advantages of Hare over C in implementing this specific functionality.

capableweb 4y ago

Every language would do us (programmers) a great favor by having a page titled "Pro & Cons" or even "When to use X / When not to use X", and could include comparing other languages as well. Maybe it's hard to sell your language if you have to include cons/when not to use X as well, but it'll help gain trust for sure. In the case of Hare, it doesn't seem to be good if you want to be able to have anything running on Windows/macOS, as one stated goal is "Hare does not, and will not, support any proprietary operating systems" according to https://harelang.org/platforms/ https://harelang.org/platforms/, which makes it very unattractive for me at least, as I move across three platforms daily.

AaronM 4y ago
How do they expect to gain traction if they refuse to support 2 of the three platforms software is developed for?
- capableweb 4y ago
  In Hare's defense, not every programming language needs to target every runtime/OS/environment. JavaScript only targets the browser. Shaders usually targets one graphic runtime. Maybe there is a space for a language that just targets a few OSes, or even just one? Remember that both C# and Swift initially just targeted one platform, so maybe it does makes sense to now have one OSS language for OSS nerds.
  - signaleleven 4y ago
    While that was true for years, Node.js has made JavaScript viable on the server for quite a while. But I agree with your overall point. I think JS and C# are good examples of languages that were seen as valuable enough to start using in other environments. I love C#.
- kragen 4y ago
  Well, naturally, with people who use the other one: Arduino. I mean FreeBSD. Or maybe FreeRTOS? Wait, Android. Or NetBSD. Or Wasm. Or JS. Or the JVM. Or the .NET CIL. Or ReactOS. Or SerenityOS. Or FreeDOS. Or Illumos. Or OpenSolaris, heh. Or just regular old GNU/Linux like 70% of the Web. But either Android installs or FreeRTOS installs easily outnumber those.

pedrolucasp 4y ago

Why do you need comparisons. Why can't you just experiment with it and use it if you want to?

tomrod 4y ago
Time has value. If the prospect isn't clear, the tradeoff of time to investigate is a waste. People are risk averse and want to understand the benefits the language was designed for relative to competing languages.
- newaccount2021 4y ago
cinntaile 4y ago
To make our lives easier. There is only so much time in a day and we would rather spend it well.
mikepurvis 4y ago
The sibling comment already says most of it, but the non-presence of a succinct comparison table is IMO a signal in itself that the language/project is a toy and not ready to be considered for production use.
- mattgreenrocks 4y ago
  I'm not sure I've seen such a thing for most languages, but maybe I'm used to just reading what a lang is about and mentally slotting it for certain things by myself. I bucket things by static/dynamic types, dominant paradigm, syntax style, GC/no GC, and stated goals, which include what it was designed for. Most of those are easy to discover.
  - mikepurvis 4y ago
    Oh absolutely, and that makes sense if the language is being pitched to individuals. But as soon as you want to convince your boss to let you use it for a project, that executive summary level info is essential. They (rightfully) do not have the time to infer it or "play around", they need a clear "it's X but better because Y, Z."