5 ms·

Is this closed source? I just assumed that a new programming language would be open source but I don't see any links to GitHub or any other place. The getting s

Is this closed source? I just assumed that a new programming language would be open source but I don't see any links to GitHub or any other place. The getting started page also requires you to put in your name and contact information.

ModernMech 3y ago
This is exactly what I was trying to figure out. It seems like the answer is no at this time.
- lairv 3y ago
  From their FAQ https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html "Will Mojo be open-sourced? Yes, we expect that Mojo will be open-sourced. However, Mojo is still young, so we will continue to incubate it within Modular until more of its internal architecture is fleshed out. We don’t have an established plan yet. Why not develop Mojo in the open from the beginning? Mojo is a big project and has several architectural differences from previous languages. We believe a tight-knit group of engineers with a common vision can move faster than a community effort. This development approach is also well-established from other projects that are now open source (such as LLVM, Clang, Swift, MLIR, etc.)."
  - theLiminator 3y ago
    Their response to why it's faster to move while closed source seems kinda like a false dichotomy. They can choose to start with it open disallow input from the community or close their issue tracker to the community.
    - vosper 3y ago
      Why bother doing it that way? Just to entertain people who works like to observe the commit history as the language evolves?
      - version_five 3y ago
        It gives people confidence to start working with it now.
      - theLiminator 3y ago
        I don't want to commit to a language/ecosystem that might pivot and not open-source.
      - xigoi 3y ago
        So that people trying out the language have the freedom know what they're running on their computer.
    - asadm 3y ago
      It's closed so others don't catch up quicker or add those optimizations upstream? Then they have no moat.
  - minhazm 3y ago
    The problem with this is that you don't know what the licensing will be when/if they open source it. So you could start using it now and they might change their mind and choose not to open source it or it might be a restrictive license.
    - neilv 3y ago
      Also, even if fully open source, have to also look at governance. (A canonical project can be steered in a way that makes it impractical for you, and forking is often also impractical.) For now, I'd treat it as closed source, which is a non-starter for investing in, when I can accomplish the same in open source ways. And there's no sense in giving away the open source uptake benefits to a company when the software isn't open source.
    - skybrian 3y ago
      That's true, but the whole language is unstable, so you shouldn't use it for anything big anyway.
  - revelio 3y ago
    So what's the business model then?
    - notfed 3y ago
      Do programming languages need business models?
      - revelio 3y ago
        One that pays expensive senior full time SWEs to build it does, yes. Every programming language uses one of two models: 1. Patronage 2. Business Patronage is the Ruby/Python/Linux "one guy + volunteers" model where a few of the devs look for companies to pay them to do it as a full or side project basically for marketing purposes or because that company can afford to subsidize their tools. This clearly isn't that. A VC backed startup making an open source language is neither patronage nor a business, unless you take the hard-cynic position of saying the investors have been tricked into being patrons. I'm assuming they've got some sort of cloud related ideas for monetization, but it's tough.
newswasboring 3y ago
Oh god I hope this is not a close source language. I have spent 10+ years fighting the MATLAB ecosystem, I prefer not to spend the next 10 years fighting this thing.
- version_five 3y ago
  Matlab existed for a reason, and has since become irrelevant, in particular in the face of python being used as a more flexible open source scientific computing scripting language. If this is closed source, it's already as irrelevant as matlab so no reason to fight it. If there are useful bits there will be python versions of them.
  - newswasboring 3y ago
    > Matlab existed for a reason, and has since become irrelevant My man I wish this was true. I am not exaggerating the 10+ year thing, there are very important industries being run today on MATLAB. You remember the moment when you learned that a lot of wall street runs on excel? This is the moment you learn a lot of silicon manufacturing runs on MATLAB. An obscene amount.
    - huijzer 3y ago
      > You remember the moment when you learned that a lot of wall street runs on excel? According to Buffett, they shouldn’t use Excel in the first place to make investment decisions.
    - steve_adams_86 3y ago
      Silicon manufacturing, aerospace, automotive, robotics, the list goes on. It’s a well-entrenched ecosystem that makes a decent chunk of cash and has a lot of staying power. Simulink seems like a major factor in this staying power.
  - singhrac 3y ago
    Strongly disagree with this statement (and agree with the parent). In many hard engineering disciplines, appropriate solvers (e.g. SuiteSparse) are barely supported, if at all (e.g. scikit-sparse only supports CHOLMOD, and UMFPACK is supported via another package). People overestimate how many people are willing to work on the "wrap C numerical library in Python" problem. On the other hand, Mathworks employs many people to work on things like mldivide. At least in the SuiteSparse case, the first class citizen is MATLAB.
Vox_Leone 3y ago
>Is this closed source? I just assumed that a new programming language would be open source but I don't see any links to GitHub or any other place. Well, by the number of 3rd party domains you have to allow to see the info it does not look free or OS...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

ModernMech 3y ago

This is exactly what I was trying to figure out. It seems like the answer is no at this time.

lairv 3y ago
From their FAQ https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html "Will Mojo be open-sourced? Yes, we expect that Mojo will be open-sourced. However, Mojo is still young, so we will continue to incubate it within Modular until more of its internal architecture is fleshed out. We don’t have an established plan yet. Why not develop Mojo in the open from the beginning? Mojo is a big project and has several architectural differences from previous languages. We believe a tight-knit group of engineers with a common vision can move faster than a community effort. This development approach is also well-established from other projects that are now open source (such as LLVM, Clang, Swift, MLIR, etc.)."
- theLiminator 3y ago
  Their response to why it's faster to move while closed source seems kinda like a false dichotomy. They can choose to start with it open disallow input from the community or close their issue tracker to the community.
  - vosper 3y ago
    Why bother doing it that way? Just to entertain people who works like to observe the commit history as the language evolves?
    - version_five 3y ago
      It gives people confidence to start working with it now.
    - theLiminator 3y ago
      I don't want to commit to a language/ecosystem that might pivot and not open-source.
    - xigoi 3y ago
      So that people trying out the language have the freedom know what they're running on their computer.
  - asadm 3y ago
    It's closed so others don't catch up quicker or add those optimizations upstream? Then they have no moat.
- minhazm 3y ago
  The problem with this is that you don't know what the licensing will be when/if they open source it. So you could start using it now and they might change their mind and choose not to open source it or it might be a restrictive license.
  - neilv 3y ago
    Also, even if fully open source, have to also look at governance. (A canonical project can be steered in a way that makes it impractical for you, and forking is often also impractical.) For now, I'd treat it as closed source, which is a non-starter for investing in, when I can accomplish the same in open source ways. And there's no sense in giving away the open source uptake benefits to a company when the software isn't open source.
  - skybrian 3y ago
    That's true, but the whole language is unstable, so you shouldn't use it for anything big anyway.
- revelio 3y ago
  So what's the business model then?
  - notfed 3y ago
    Do programming languages need business models?
    - revelio 3y ago
      One that pays expensive senior full time SWEs to build it does, yes. Every programming language uses one of two models: 1. Patronage 2. Business Patronage is the Ruby/Python/Linux "one guy + volunteers" model where a few of the devs look for companies to pay them to do it as a full or side project basically for marketing purposes or because that company can afford to subsidize their tools. This clearly isn't that. A VC backed startup making an open source language is neither patronage nor a business, unless you take the hard-cynic position of saying the investors have been tricked into being patrons. I'm assuming they've got some sort of cloud related ideas for monetization, but it's tough.

newswasboring 3y ago

Oh god I hope this is not a close source language. I have spent 10+ years fighting the MATLAB ecosystem, I prefer not to spend the next 10 years fighting this thing.

version_five 3y ago
Matlab existed for a reason, and has since become irrelevant, in particular in the face of python being used as a more flexible open source scientific computing scripting language. If this is closed source, it's already as irrelevant as matlab so no reason to fight it. If there are useful bits there will be python versions of them.
- newswasboring 3y ago
  > Matlab existed for a reason, and has since become irrelevant My man I wish this was true. I am not exaggerating the 10+ year thing, there are very important industries being run today on MATLAB. You remember the moment when you learned that a lot of wall street runs on excel? This is the moment you learn a lot of silicon manufacturing runs on MATLAB. An obscene amount.
  - huijzer 3y ago
    > You remember the moment when you learned that a lot of wall street runs on excel? According to Buffett, they shouldn’t use Excel in the first place to make investment decisions.
  - steve_adams_86 3y ago
    Silicon manufacturing, aerospace, automotive, robotics, the list goes on. It’s a well-entrenched ecosystem that makes a decent chunk of cash and has a lot of staying power. Simulink seems like a major factor in this staying power.
- singhrac 3y ago
  Strongly disagree with this statement (and agree with the parent). In many hard engineering disciplines, appropriate solvers (e.g. SuiteSparse) are barely supported, if at all (e.g. scikit-sparse only supports CHOLMOD, and UMFPACK is supported via another package). People overestimate how many people are willing to work on the "wrap C numerical library in Python" problem. On the other hand, Mathworks employs many people to work on things like mldivide. At least in the SuiteSparse case, the first class citizen is MATLAB.

Vox_Leone 3y ago

>Is this closed source? I just assumed that a new programming language would be open source but I don't see any links to GitHub or any other place. Well, by the number of 3rd party domains you have to allow to see the info it does not look free or OS...

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]