4 ms·

The claims they are making are extremely bold. On the front page of their website, they claim to have full compatibility with python code, an ownership model

The claims they are making are extremely bold. On the front page of their website, they claim to have full compatibility with python code, an ownership model and a borrow checker, and being as fast or faster than C++. These are just some of the first things I noticed! Apparently one of the people involved with the creation of this language have some credibility which is pretty confusing. They are the CEO of the company behind "mojo" as well. I think this is going to be another V-lang situation personally, despite the credibility of Lattner. I think this is just someone seeing an opportunity to cash in on the "AI hype" situation that exists currently. Even reputable people can be influenced to do shady things when lots of money is involved! This is of course just my opinion and I wouldn't mind being proven wrong, but I'm definitely very skeptical right now!

Tozen 3y ago
> I think this is going to be another V-lang situation personally, despite the credibility of Lattner. I think this is just someone seeing an opportunity to cash in on the "AI hype" situation that exists currently. Mojo is not only directed at AI, but at Python users as an alternative and superset. The use of it for AI, is partially based on the use case of Python. Insinuating that Mojo is trying to "cash in" on "AI hype", is odd in the context of all the others who clearly do so, but where is the "cash in" at? Mojo and Vlang are free. Vlang (V-lang) has made no such marketing claims in regards to AI, so pairing the languages together comes across as odd. If the argument is about "cashing in", that looks even weirder. The users of both languages can get it for free. As with any programming language, there can be donations and sponsors. Why would it be a problem for Mojo or Vlang to have sponsors, but somehow not so for other competing languages, in regards to their claims? This comes across as at least one is fine with their favorite language getting sponsors or donations, but not others. Or maybe hoping to cut the funding sources of new languages, so there will be less competition. > Even reputable people can be influenced to do shady things when lots of money is involved! The accusation or insinuation is being made that Lattner is "shady" for money, while a backhand is being thrown at Vlang too. Outside of throwing smears, there is no proof of them being in it for hustling money or doing anything that different from what competing programming language creators have and are doing. And that's without talking about the corporate created languages, where obviously money and market share are major driving forces for them.

Tozen 3y ago

> I think this is going to be another V-lang situation personally, despite the credibility of Lattner. I think this is just someone seeing an opportunity to cash in on the "AI hype" situation that exists currently. Mojo is not only directed at AI, but at Python users as an alternative and superset. The use of it for AI, is partially based on the use case of Python. Insinuating that Mojo is trying to "cash in" on "AI hype", is odd in the context of all the others who clearly do so, but where is the "cash in" at? Mojo and Vlang are free. Vlang (V-lang) has made no such marketing claims in regards to AI, so pairing the languages together comes across as odd. If the argument is about "cashing in", that looks even weirder. The users of both languages can get it for free. As with any programming language, there can be donations and sponsors. Why would it be a problem for Mojo or Vlang to have sponsors, but somehow not so for other competing languages, in regards to their claims? This comes across as at least one is fine with their favorite language getting sponsors or donations, but not others. Or maybe hoping to cut the funding sources of new languages, so there will be less competition. > Even reputable people can be influenced to do shady things when lots of money is involved! The accusation or insinuation is being made that Lattner is "shady" for money, while a backhand is being thrown at Vlang too. Outside of throwing smears, there is no proof of them being in it for hustling money or doing anything that different from what competing programming language creators have and are doing. And that's without talking about the corporate created languages, where obviously money and market share are major driving forces for them.