36 ms·

Mojo is available for local download

291 points by hasheddan 3y ago

mindB 3y ago
Still not open-source it looks like [2]. I'm not willing to create an account right now. Can someone who has an account post what the pricing looks like if any? I'd also be curious what other agreements you have to make other than the terms of service[1] you agree to when making an account. [1] https://modular.com/terms https://modular.com/terms [2] https://github.com/modularml/mojo/blob/5823e1d9d176916c236c5d0737e5a7ffcea8277f/README.md?plain=1#L8 https://github.com/modularml/mojo/blob/5823e1d9d176916c236c5...
- colesantiago 3y ago
  I'm not willing to make an account either, I'm too scared what Modular will do with my data for privacy reasons, especially seeing that giant Google sign in button. Hopefully, someone will and sign up so that we know Modular intends to do with our data once they collect it.
  - rdedev 3y ago
    I bit the bullet. After singing in via google, its just a page with instructions on installing the Mojo SDK. Nothing about pricing but on their FAQ section they do talk about the telemetry data they collect and how to disable it https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html#does-the-mojo-sdk-collect-telemetry https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html#does-the-mojo-sdk-col...
  - phlipski 3y ago
    With all due respect - scared of what? I'm genuinely curious what you're worried about. Can you give me some real world examples of a possible negative repercussion from signing up? I haven't signed up. I don't have an account, just been a curious lurker for the Mojo thing over the past couple of months.
  - jackclayton 3y ago
    Hi, thanks for your interest! You can opt out of telemetry if you like. Please see the FAQ here: https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html#does-the-mojo-sdk-collect-telemetry https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html#does-the-mojo-sdk-col... For open sourcing, we also have a section in our FAQ: https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html#open-source https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html#open-source, and we answered a question about that in the latest livestream! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQh9es5gfpo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQh9es5gfpo For the question on pricing, the Mojo SDK is free to use. Disclaimer: I work for Modular
    - iruoy 3y ago
      Soo maybe some "core" "parts" might be open sourced some time. Hard pass.
    - DiffProg 3y ago
      0:16 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQh9es5gfpo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQh9es5gfpo, says "we'll be open sourcing documentation"... by the end of the year. Documentation? It will have taken a full year to open source documentation. Congrats.
      - CoreyFieldens 3y ago
        That's disingenuous. They are also open sourcing the standard library by the end of the year.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
- barryrandall 3y ago
  Python is slow, but it's not "invest time building software with a closed source language from a new company" slow.
  - satvikpendem 3y ago
    Yeah, and I assume in the future Python will get its own JIT or AOT compiler, if people really demand it. Most Python for scientific programming is just a higher level glue code for the C++ underneath.
    - Tommah 3y ago
      Python already has JIT compilers (PyPy and Numba).
  - mathisfun123 3y ago
    I really do wonder who they're targeting as a paying customer. What dev/team is all of these things 1. Getting paid to work on ML to such an extent that perf is important (enough) 2. Comfortable leaving the warm confines of python and a huge ecosystem 3. Willing to learn a brand new, closed source, beta maturity language 4. Does inference on CPU 5. Willing to run their inference pipeline behind some FaaS layer because that's how I'm assuming modular plans to make money? The alternative is an honest to goodness licensed compiler and that seems even more farfetched (though I guess not beyond the realm of possibility). What I wouldn't give to be in the room when they're pitching VCs because they've managed to raise a lot of money for what looks like a TAM of like 5 people.
    - capitalsigma 3y ago
      It seems like they're targeting AI chip start ups with the promise of a compiler framework that can integrate with a custom backend
      - mathisfun123 3y ago
        that doesn't jive at all with "closed source" and "walled garden" and "remote sdk".
- s3v 3y ago
  Make your own account. And pricing? What are you talking about?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
dom96 3y ago
I’m really excited about Mojo, but can’t help but feel like Modular’s insistence to register for the download is a red flag for how they will handle Mojo development. It leaves a bit of a bad impression.
- manojlds 3y ago
  Better this than pull a Hashicorp.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
smacke 3y ago
Didn't try downloading the SDK yet, but in the playground, seems like the "Python superset" advertisement does not hold (trying to define a class gives "error: classes not implemented yet"). Great to see progress in this space but I think the real killer feature of Mojo would be to run any existing Python program and allow programmers to incrementally adopt Mojo's syntax for targeted optimizations, and seems like we're not there yet.
- graypegg 3y ago
  Something feels so... off about this. It's a closed source product (I think? I see no where to contribute) so I can imagine the need for walling off local dev tools until they're ready for prime time, but it doesn't even seem like they are ready. They'll have you sign up before downloading some blackbox SDK that half-implements a language that they pinky-promise they won't abandon and you have no recourse to recover if they do. If their intent is to flesh out a basic product then open things up, then I take that back, but as of right now, they seem to be pitching it as "ready to go" based on the copy here. That's a lot of trust to put with them.
  - UncleOxidant 3y ago
    Yeah, when they first announced Mojo I thought it would take a lot of wind out of Julia's sails, but I'm starting to think that's not going to be the case. Title should probably be changed to "Mojo: It's kind'a, partly here"
    - WanderPanda 3y ago
      Yes especially because Julia has quite good Python interoperability
- giancarlostoro 3y ago
  I hope they at least target most / all the syntax at a minimum.
- eddtests 3y ago
  Ha, that is a substantial gap. I was expecting some issues with third party libraries, not a core part of the language missing.
frou_dh 3y ago
I wonder whether this will end up being a viable language for people who just want to write fast general purpose code with Python's syntax, and not write any AI/ML-related stuff.
- zinclozenge 3y ago
  Hard to say, as far as I can tell there's no networking libraries right now.
- ActivePattern 3y ago
  AFAIK, it's a general purpose language. I don't see any reason you wouldn't be able to use it for applications outside of ML.
  - frou_dh 3y ago
    Well there are countless obscure general-purpose languages and language implementations. What I meant by viable is that the user won't feel like a masochist because of weak tooling and library availability.
    - ActivePattern 3y ago
      The goal is to have Mojo be fully compatible with Python, so that you should eventually have access to all of the libraries offered in Python. How many libraries will be written in Mojo remains to be seen, depending on whether it catches on or not.
eddtests 3y ago
Who would risk using a closed-source language? I know some academic groups using Matlab, and I know some engineering companies use tools like Simulink, but these are very established products. I don't think I could even get sign-off for using a new closed language for a work project...
- asdfman123 3y ago
  What if someone were to take away our Mojo?
  - eddtests 3y ago
    Oh, behave Edit: Now I have Austin Powers stuck in my head when I see Mojo
    - asdfman123 3y ago
      [flagged]
- knowsuchagency 3y ago
  I agree. It's not "here" until it's open-source.
- __alexs 3y ago
  I believe K is still quite popular at various banks.
  - eddtests 3y ago
    Probably, but again K is a language from 1993. I think closed-source languages are relics from a time it was more normal and some are so established they're still accepted, but new closed-source languages feel out of touch. Can you think of any new ones that caught on? I really can't to be honest!
    - Conscat 3y ago
jebarker 3y ago
It's unclear to me from the article or docs: does this release of Mojo support GPU?
- DiffProg 3y ago
  Well assuming that a usable thing exists seems to be where you went wrong according to the reports on Twitter and such haha.
  - bookmark1231 3y ago
    RTFM.
    - jjtheblunt 3y ago
      i find myself thinking that numerous times a day (not on HN only), and it occurs to me that this acronym might itself not be known, since you'd have to RTFM to figure it itself out.
      - jebarker 3y ago
        I'm lost. Who needs to RTFM?
knowsuchagency 3y ago
I've had high hopes for this project since its announcement, but until it's open-source, I'm not investing any time in it. That's the only announcement I care about
- etra0 3y ago
  Same, and even worse, the playground requires you to be logged in. That's like the initial step of a demo and requiring an account is simply nuts.
  - uoaei 3y ago
    The same is true of GPT. Just sayin. Actually GPT is worse because they demand both a phone number and an email. Still haven't signed up because of that nonsense.
    - debugnik 3y ago
      LLM inference takes up some scarce GPU time and many people are trying to use free entrypoints to build services instead of the intended paid APIs, so I understand why those services want to put limits on usage. Programming playgrounds however are freely available for pretty much every mildly popular language, and these days many toolchains can even be compiled and run with JS or WASM so one could just serve some static files to host it. This is definitely more suspicious than what OpenAI and other ML companies are doing.
    - archargelod 3y ago
      I can understand why openai requires phone number. With how much resources they spend on each prompt, they want to limit abuse of their systems. Also ChatGpt is not available in many countries and a phone number is reliable enough test of location. I am myself in one of these countries, but I also care about my privacy, so I use services that use chatGPT indirectly instead: https://you.com https://you.com with disposable email and https://phind.com https://phind.com
      - 3y ago
fire 3y ago
> Mojo is now available for local download – beginning with Linux systems, and adding Mac and Windows in coming releases. sure would be nice if this was front and center on the actual website; the download page requires the user create an account in order to even find out that linux is the only supported platform at present.
phillipcarter 3y ago
Really excited about Mojo, but not very excited about being fully closed source. I understand not going OSS right now if there's still a lot of churn expected, but I think that can be worked around: 1. Just because something is OSS doesn't mean the public is entitled to defining the roadmap or design decisions. If you set working norms up front and make it clear who has decision-making power and why, people will decide for themselves if they want to engage or not. A lot of frustration in OSS comes from lack of clear boundaries around how and why something evolves the way it does. 2. You can meet in the middle and be source-open. Don't use an OSI license, don't guarantee that you'll look at a community contribution, and don't guarantee that you'll engage on a particular issue. People can still benefit from seeing the source and deciding on if it's the right tool for them. I know a lot of folks rag on "corporate controlled OSS", but there's a lot of examples of that motion working really well for products. I hope Mojo does this eventually.
- pavelstoev 3y ago
  which is why we created Hidet, open-source deep learning compiler, written in Python and which can be easily extended to create all kinds of ML projects (wink, wink) with support for Nvidia GPUs. I am still looking for information on Mojo support of Nvidia GPUs, de-facto compute standard for modern AI/ML. https://docs.hidet.org/stable/gallery/developer-guides/hidet-script-dynamic-kernel.html https://docs.hidet.org/stable/gallery/developer-guides/hidet...
Exuma 3y ago
Is what they have achieved really that ... magical, that it needs to be a closed source project? I don't know much about python, but I suspect if someone watches the demo the methodology behind what they're doing is probably clear no? I don't understand the purpose of close sourcing it unless there really is some kind of moat.
- gobdovan 3y ago
  You can't have Python run that much faster without loosing lots of features. I guess if they open sourced it, people wouldn't be that impressed with what they implemented. This video [0] from the creator of Flask explains it quite well. Here [1] is Guido talking about Mojo being in early days and sharing some technical details. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCGofLIzX6g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCGofLIzX6g [1] https://discuss.python.org/t/mojo-python-with-c-gpu-performance/26993/7 https://discuss.python.org/t/mojo-python-with-c-gpu-performa...
lambda_garden 3y ago
Why are people so enthused about Python syntax? Some problems off the top of my head: - The lack of new variable declaration keyword makes scopes less explicit. nonlocal is not simpler in the large than `let x = ...` - The lack of multi-line lambdas is very limiting for anyone coming from JS, C#, Rust, Kotlin... heck even Java - The ternary operator (... if ... else ...) is needlessly different for other mainstream languages
- mmoskal 3y ago
  I agree (and would add explicit self argument, the fact that all your imports are exported and more) I think the point here is to reuse the Python ecosystem especially in ML.
- kstrauser 3y ago
  Throwing this out there: - I’ve used nonlocal 0 times ever. - I get that people miss them, but you can define nested functions if you want. Nameless functions are nifty, but I’ve never lost sleep over putting `def foo` in front of what would’ve been a lambda in other languages. - I kinda like the Python ternaries. Preferences are A-OK, and I’m not saying you’re wrong. Just chiming in that the things you mention aren’t universally disliked.
  - chombier 3y ago
    > I’ve used nonlocal 0 times ever. Same here, but I got bitten by weird scoping rules quite a few times. Separating variable definition from assignment (e.g. with 'let') would probably help a lot in this case.
- bookmark1231 3y ago
  I concede about multi line lambdas but far too many languages take a “syntax is bikeshedding and unimportant” approach to language design. New languages are still using “&&” and “||” as if it’s 1975 and syntax highlighting doesn’t exist. Looking at C++, Rust and even Zig code is unnecessarily complicated for someone who isn’t intimately familiar with the syntax meanwhile for the most part anyone can understand Python syntax (well, at least Python syntax that doesn’t abuse decorators and obscure dunder overloads)
Rucadi 3y ago
I'll wait until someone uploads a docker image with code-server in it or something
ayhanfuat 3y ago
It seems quite exciting and all but I cannot figure out why they choose to impress people with marketing posts like "it is a billion times faster, oh no it is actually a zillion times faster" while their actual potential user base is waiting for license issues to be clarified.
- danielvaughn 3y ago
  Yeah I believe the actual quoted figure was "35,000 times faster than Python". It's a silly metric either way.
  - ayhanfuat 3y ago
    They have recently published a blog series which started with 35,000x and ended with 68,000x [1]. The thing is anyone familiar with performance sensitive code is not looking at Python vs the other thing. They are looking for whether or not it is in the ballpark of C, Julia, Cython, Numba, etc. Those are the contenders, not Python. [1] https://www.modular.com/blog/mojo-a-journey-to-68-000x-speedup-over-python-part-3 https://www.modular.com/blog/mojo-a-journey-to-68-000x-speed...
    - luma 3y ago
      If you read the description, they started with 35,000x, then tripled the number of cores to get 68,000x. If your triple the cores and wind up with less than twice the performance, your scaling isn't very good.
      - vorticalbox 3y ago
        Depends on the task not all tasks scales linearly
      - fooker 3y ago
        It is very good, especially if you don't have to rewrite your code. Try to do it yourself (say take a merge sort implementation and try to make it scale), it'll be roughly this much after a few hours of work. Now imagine the compiler is doing this for you.
dang 3y ago
Related. Others? How Mojo gets a speedup over Python – Part 2 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37307260 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37307260 - Aug 2023 (63 comments) Mojo gets a speedup over Python – Part 1 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37294001 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37294001 - Aug 2023 (3 comments) Introduction to Mojo Language - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37200400 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37200400 - Aug 2023 (3 comments) Guido van Rossum feedback to Chris Lattner on Mojo programming language [video] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36389804 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36389804 - June 2023 (3 comments) A first look at the Mojo language. as easy as Python, as fast as Rust - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36289625 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36289625 - June 2023 (1 comment) Why use the new Mojo programming language? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35852734 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35852734 - May 2023 (4 comments) Mojo: The usability of Python with the performance of C - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35825399 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35825399 - May 2023 (45 comments) Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35790367 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35790367 - May 2023 (261 comments) Chris Lattner and Modular Announce Mojo, a New Programming Language - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35789890 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35789890 - May 2023 (10 comments)
- qwertox 3y ago
  Chris Lattner: Future of Programming and AI – Lex Fridman Podcast #381 [video] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36173382 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36173382 - June 2023 (1 comment) While it didn't get traction, it's a good interview which talks a lot about the language.
  - hoosier_daddy 3y ago
    This was a great podcast and well worth a listen. It answers most of the questions I see folks asking here.
  - osigurdson 3y ago
    I literally could not sleep after listening to that podcast. This is very exciting!
samuell 3y ago
Hmm, a bit of a rough experience. I had a few lines of python code, to count the fraction of A:s and C:s in a DNA (fasta) file adapted from [1]: with open("chry_multiplied.fa") as infile: a: int = 0 t: int = 0 g: int = 0 c: int = 0 for line in infile: if line[0] != '>' and len(line) != line.count("N") + 1: g += line.count("G") c += line.count("C") a += line.count("A") t += line.count("T") total_base_count = a + t + c + g gc_count = g + c gc_fraction = float(gc_count) / total_base_count print( gc_fraction * 100 ) Result: $ mojo run gc.mojo gc.mojo:1:6: error: use of unknown declaration 'open' with open("chry_multiplied.fa") as infile: ... "open" must be one of the most used Python functions ... :/ [1] https://github.com/samuell/gccontent-benchmark https://github.com/samuell/gccontent-benchmark
- samuell 3y ago
  Ok, well, found some disclaimers in the docs now: https://docs.modular.com/mojo/manual/basics/#python-integration https://docs.modular.com/mojo/manual/basics/#python-integrat... https://docs.modular.com/mojo/roadmap.html https://docs.modular.com/mojo/roadmap.html
- mathisfun123 3y ago
  man two days ago when i said their promise of compatibility with python was startup hype i got no traction. like duh they'll over-promise and underdeliver - it's chapter 1 of every single SV playbook.
  - qaq 3y ago
    Have you looked at the team? This is pretty early in the development
    - mathisfun123 3y ago
      > Have you looked at the team? i am friends/former co-workers with several people on the "team". doesn't mean i can't/won't/shouldn't call out startup hype when i see it. and again: the criticism has been borne out because this comment chain is off an example of an epic fail. > This is pretty early in the development you don't applaud someone that says they're going to do something just because they're fancy. like is this even up for debate? at such later date and time where they deliver i will be first in line to congratulate them (maybe even as a user) but not until then.
mrcwinn 3y ago
A rant. I apologize. I try to avoid on HN and in general. Faster, yes, but at what cost? I'm so impressed by the Python community, but I'll never quite understand why they gravitated to... Python itself. It's unbelievable to me that in Mojo's case some of the brightest, most famous engineers have gathered to do incredible computer science work to improve the compute performance of a language that is fundamentally flawed in its performance characteristics for those very applications. It just seems like such a waste. How on earth did we arrive at this moment? Chris Lattner is right in his Lex interview: he had to accept that the community was already committed to Python and given that reality, that in turn pre-filtered his available paths. But my god, what if the community had gravitated to a better language [for these purposes] in the first place? How much further along would we be in our tooling and capabilities to deliver value? Chris, who I admire, loves to talk about language design decisions; loves to talk about how thoughtful they were in the decision-making around Swift; and then in the next breath says, hey whitespace-based scoping doesn't matter, don't worry about these things. Chris all you do is worry about these things, and worry about them for Mojo. He clearly has opinions that he masks about design choices Python has made; otherwise, after all, why the need to make Mojo? It just seems like at the end of the day, Mojo may be the most technologically advanced lipstick ever to be placed on a pig. (Edit for grammar, but clearly not for brevity or conciseness. XD)
- geenat 3y ago
  The curly brace community already has tons of great choices. Let indent people have their mojo.
  - mrcwinn 3y ago
    I should have deleted that whole section. I know, I know. Sure, in some world, a whitespace character should dictate placement and lifetime in memory. That's my not preferred world, but also different spokes for different folks. :-)
- mrbungie 3y ago
  > But my god, what if the community had gravitated to a better language [for these purposes] in the first place? How much further along would we be in our tooling and capabilities to deliver value? Better in what regard? Performance? Maybe there are more important things than performance, like ease of use and barriers to entry. People in this space already tackle essentially complex problems, don't throw more accidental complexity in the form of "better" or more performant languages/APIs.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
awb 3y ago
Still not available for Mac with Intel chips unfortunately
- zer0zzz 3y ago
  Not available for anything but Linux x64
ThinkBeat 3y ago
I need a programming language that is integrated with blockchains and crypto coins, with quantum computing integrated as well as it being for AI and it has to be for writing running on the Edge serverless and databaseless with frameworks to fully support a decentralized solutions with and built in features switches to show which codeblocks are open source and which ones are proprietary. It must be strictly functional, not use too many (()) with dynamic stating typing and it must support google scale from the start and make it impossible to create anything that doesn't require K8, and most of all it must be even more AI
brancz 3y ago
Pretty neat! Tried profiling it since it aims for high performance use cases. Love how far we can get with standards in software engineering that we can just take this new language/runtime and just profile it! Wrote a quick blog post on it here: https://www.polarsignals.com/blog/posts/2023/09/07/profiling-mojo/ https://www.polarsignals.com/blog/posts/2023/09/07/profiling...
qaq 3y ago
Do not care about ML side much but having Rust like features with Python syntax will be fun. Plus tooling will obviously be top notch.
ShadowBanThis01 3y ago
Whatever that is...
coryaf 3y ago
I'm excited, but it's a shame that it's not available for Apple silicon yet. I really think this is the future of Python
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
teleforce 3y ago
I probably in the minority but for me D language is already the near perfect language to replace Python and becoming very productive and useful for data science and machine learning programming purposes. For data science and machine learning, they are two type of programmers namely A and B type, for analysis and building respectively [1]. The former are mostly analysts, scientists or mathematicians that are mainly non-programmer and the B are hardcore programmer that build engine, library, systems and sometime for real-time processing for example embedded signal processing. For the former, their programming bias are closer to pseudo code and naturally they inclined more towards intuitive programming languages for examples Python and Matlab. For the latter, however, they are mainly library and system builders with real-time bias and their favorite tool are C, C++ and perhaps Rust. Essentially, Type A prefer easy, low barrier and intuitive languages where real-time is not necessary, while on the other hand Type B required real-time functionality and efficiency regardless of language programming complexity. From the beginning of programming time, none of the programming languages can really satisfy both types, and that's the main reason Fortran, C and C++ based library are still being widely used by Python, Matlab and Julia, case in point namely LAPACK/BLAS, Eigen and FTTW. D, however, is more than capable of matching and replacing these traditional powerhouse libraries since seven years ago with its Mir equivalent and D should easily satisfy the Type B crowd [3]. Heck you can even write bare metal system without OS with it [4]. Meanwhile, writing bare metal in Julia probably not a very good idea [5]. The harder is to satisfy is the type B crowd and unlike Type B they're fast becoming majority users of the programming languages and this is manifest by the increasing popularity of Python language. For further reading, I'd highly recommend this Ask HN threads on Why did Python win [6]. This is where D language come into the picture, and apparently with D you can have your cake and eat it too [7]. D creators have cleverly make the language has default GC despite extreme disagreement from Type A crowd and they will let you know every time D is mentioned anywhere in the public forum. However, they're kind of missing the big picture since they are fast becoming the vocal minority and most if not all of their requirements can be met with D as proven by Mir [3]. Not only this, D creators also banned macro from the language so D does not have the same fate as Ruby where some Rubyists considered RoR as a ghetto although it's extremely popular and probably the main reason why people is using Ruby in the first place [8]. D seems to hits the sweet spot in becoming the Goldilocks of programming language and it's already an open and mature language that's included in GCC eco-system. Ultimately D need to appeal to the Type A data scientists and this where D creators has gone out of their way to make D as intuitive and Pythonic as possible. In their paper on "Seven Deadly Sins of Introductory Programming Language Design", where these Monash university professors analyzed these popular programming languages back in the day (1996) for their suitability in introductory programming language design namely ABC, Ada, C, C++, Eiffel, Haskell, LISP, Modula 3, Pascal, Prolog, Scheme and Turing [9]. It's a shame that Python is not included because back in 1996 when the paper was written it's still in infancy and not popular as today. Personally, I'd add that not adding a GC as the 8th major or deadly sins of the introductory programming language but it's probably just me. I'm pretty sure that D language authors and designers did not read this seminal paper when they're designing D (I know I asked), but it seems to follow this natural and universal guiding principles that I hope Mojo authors and designers, and other programming languages, will heed as well. [1] There are two types of data scientists - and two types of problems to solve: https://medium.com/@jamesdensmore/there-are-two-types-of-data-scientists-and-two-types-of-problems-to-solve-a149a0148e64 https://medium.com/@jamesdensmore/there-are-two-types-of-dat... [2] List of numerical libraries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_numerical_libraries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_numerical_libraries [3] Numeric age for D: Mir GLAS is faster than OpenBLAS and Eigen http://blog.mir.dlang.io/glas/benchmark/openblas/2016/09/23/glas-gemm-benchmark.html http://blog.mir.dlang.io/glas/benchmark/openblas/2016/09/23/... [4] Writing a bare-metal RISC-V application in D: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37346218 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37346218 [5] Running Julia bare-metal on an Arduino: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31481895 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31481895 [6] Ask HN: Why did Python win? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37308747 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37308747 [7] Why I use the D programming language for scripting: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36928485 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36928485 [8] Stop Designing Languages. Write Libraries Instead: https://lbstanza.org/purpose_of_programming_languages.html https://lbstanza.org/purpose_of_programming_languages.html [9] Seven Deadly Sins of Introductory Programming Language Design: https://users.monash.edu/~damian/papers/PDF/SevenDeadlySins.pdf https://users.monash.edu/~damian/papers/PDF/SevenDeadlySins....
fnands 3y ago
I had a quick look at it: https://fnands.com/mojo-advent-of-code/ https://fnands.com/mojo-advent-of-code/ It honestly feels a lot like writing C++ with Python syntax. Still a lot missing, but excited to see where it goes.

291 points by hasheddan 3y ago

Still not open-source it looks like [2]. I'm not willing to create an account right now. Can someone who has an account post what the pricing looks like if any? I'd also be curious what other agreements you have to make other than the terms of service[1] you agree to when making an account. [1] https://modular.com/terms https://modular.com/terms [2] https://github.com/modularml/mojo/blob/5823e1d9d176916c236c5d0737e5a7ffcea8277f/README.md?plain=1#L8 https://github.com/modularml/mojo/blob/5823e1d9d176916c236c5...

colesantiago 3y ago
I'm not willing to make an account either, I'm too scared what Modular will do with my data for privacy reasons, especially seeing that giant Google sign in button. Hopefully, someone will and sign up so that we know Modular intends to do with our data once they collect it.
- rdedev 3y ago
  I bit the bullet. After singing in via google, its just a page with instructions on installing the Mojo SDK. Nothing about pricing but on their FAQ section they do talk about the telemetry data they collect and how to disable it https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html#does-the-mojo-sdk-collect-telemetry https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html#does-the-mojo-sdk-col...
- phlipski 3y ago
  With all due respect - scared of what? I'm genuinely curious what you're worried about. Can you give me some real world examples of a possible negative repercussion from signing up? I haven't signed up. I don't have an account, just been a curious lurker for the Mojo thing over the past couple of months.
- jackclayton 3y ago
  Hi, thanks for your interest! You can opt out of telemetry if you like. Please see the FAQ here: https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html#does-the-mojo-sdk-collect-telemetry https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html#does-the-mojo-sdk-col... For open sourcing, we also have a section in our FAQ: https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html#open-source https://docs.modular.com/mojo/faq.html#open-source, and we answered a question about that in the latest livestream! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQh9es5gfpo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQh9es5gfpo For the question on pricing, the Mojo SDK is free to use. Disclaimer: I work for Modular
  - iruoy 3y ago
    Soo maybe some "core" "parts" might be open sourced some time. Hard pass.
  - DiffProg 3y ago
    0:16 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQh9es5gfpo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQh9es5gfpo, says "we'll be open sourcing documentation"... by the end of the year. Documentation? It will have taken a full year to open source documentation. Congrats.
    - CoreyFieldens 3y ago
      That's disingenuous. They are also open sourcing the standard library by the end of the year.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
barryrandall 3y ago
Python is slow, but it's not "invest time building software with a closed source language from a new company" slow.
- satvikpendem 3y ago
  Yeah, and I assume in the future Python will get its own JIT or AOT compiler, if people really demand it. Most Python for scientific programming is just a higher level glue code for the C++ underneath.
  - Tommah 3y ago
    Python already has JIT compilers (PyPy and Numba).
- mathisfun123 3y ago
  I really do wonder who they're targeting as a paying customer. What dev/team is all of these things 1. Getting paid to work on ML to such an extent that perf is important (enough) 2. Comfortable leaving the warm confines of python and a huge ecosystem 3. Willing to learn a brand new, closed source, beta maturity language 4. Does inference on CPU 5. Willing to run their inference pipeline behind some FaaS layer because that's how I'm assuming modular plans to make money? The alternative is an honest to goodness licensed compiler and that seems even more farfetched (though I guess not beyond the realm of possibility). What I wouldn't give to be in the room when they're pitching VCs because they've managed to raise a lot of money for what looks like a TAM of like 5 people.
  - capitalsigma 3y ago
    It seems like they're targeting AI chip start ups with the promise of a compiler framework that can integrate with a custom backend
    - mathisfun123 3y ago
      that doesn't jive at all with "closed source" and "walled garden" and "remote sdk".
s3v 3y ago
Make your own account. And pricing? What are you talking about?

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

dom96 3y ago

I’m really excited about Mojo, but can’t help but feel like Modular’s insistence to register for the download is a red flag for how they will handle Mojo development. It leaves a bit of a bad impression.

manojlds 3y ago
Better this than pull a Hashicorp.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

smacke 3y ago

Didn't try downloading the SDK yet, but in the playground, seems like the "Python superset" advertisement does not hold (trying to define a class gives "error: classes not implemented yet"). Great to see progress in this space but I think the real killer feature of Mojo would be to run any existing Python program and allow programmers to incrementally adopt Mojo's syntax for targeted optimizations, and seems like we're not there yet.

graypegg 3y ago
Something feels so... off about this. It's a closed source product (I think? I see no where to contribute) so I can imagine the need for walling off local dev tools until they're ready for prime time, but it doesn't even seem like they are ready. They'll have you sign up before downloading some blackbox SDK that half-implements a language that they pinky-promise they won't abandon and you have no recourse to recover if they do. If their intent is to flesh out a basic product then open things up, then I take that back, but as of right now, they seem to be pitching it as "ready to go" based on the copy here. That's a lot of trust to put with them.
- UncleOxidant 3y ago
  Yeah, when they first announced Mojo I thought it would take a lot of wind out of Julia's sails, but I'm starting to think that's not going to be the case. Title should probably be changed to "Mojo: It's kind'a, partly here"
  - WanderPanda 3y ago
    Yes especially because Julia has quite good Python interoperability
giancarlostoro 3y ago
I hope they at least target most / all the syntax at a minimum.
eddtests 3y ago
Ha, that is a substantial gap. I was expecting some issues with third party libraries, not a core part of the language missing.

frou_dh 3y ago

I wonder whether this will end up being a viable language for people who just want to write fast general purpose code with Python's syntax, and not write any AI/ML-related stuff.

zinclozenge 3y ago
Hard to say, as far as I can tell there's no networking libraries right now.
ActivePattern 3y ago
AFAIK, it's a general purpose language. I don't see any reason you wouldn't be able to use it for applications outside of ML.
- frou_dh 3y ago
  Well there are countless obscure general-purpose languages and language implementations. What I meant by viable is that the user won't feel like a masochist because of weak tooling and library availability.
  - ActivePattern 3y ago
    The goal is to have Mojo be fully compatible with Python, so that you should eventually have access to all of the libraries offered in Python. How many libraries will be written in Mojo remains to be seen, depending on whether it catches on or not.

eddtests 3y ago

Who would risk using a closed-source language? I know some academic groups using Matlab, and I know some engineering companies use tools like Simulink, but these are very established products. I don't think I could even get sign-off for using a new closed language for a work project...

asdfman123 3y ago
What if someone were to take away our Mojo?
- eddtests 3y ago
  Oh, behave Edit: Now I have Austin Powers stuck in my head when I see Mojo
  - asdfman123 3y ago
    [flagged]
knowsuchagency 3y ago
I agree. It's not "here" until it's open-source.
__alexs 3y ago
I believe K is still quite popular at various banks.
- eddtests 3y ago
  Probably, but again K is a language from 1993. I think closed-source languages are relics from a time it was more normal and some are so established they're still accepted, but new closed-source languages feel out of touch. Can you think of any new ones that caught on? I really can't to be honest!
  - Conscat 3y ago

jebarker 3y ago

It's unclear to me from the article or docs: does this release of Mojo support GPU?

DiffProg 3y ago
Well assuming that a usable thing exists seems to be where you went wrong according to the reports on Twitter and such haha.
- bookmark1231 3y ago
  RTFM.
  - jjtheblunt 3y ago
    i find myself thinking that numerous times a day (not on HN only), and it occurs to me that this acronym might itself not be known, since you'd have to RTFM to figure it itself out.
    - jebarker 3y ago
      I'm lost. Who needs to RTFM?

knowsuchagency 3y ago

I've had high hopes for this project since its announcement, but until it's open-source, I'm not investing any time in it. That's the only announcement I care about

etra0 3y ago
Same, and even worse, the playground requires you to be logged in. That's like the initial step of a demo and requiring an account is simply nuts.
- uoaei 3y ago
  The same is true of GPT. Just sayin. Actually GPT is worse because they demand both a phone number and an email. Still haven't signed up because of that nonsense.
  - debugnik 3y ago
    LLM inference takes up some scarce GPU time and many people are trying to use free entrypoints to build services instead of the intended paid APIs, so I understand why those services want to put limits on usage. Programming playgrounds however are freely available for pretty much every mildly popular language, and these days many toolchains can even be compiled and run with JS or WASM so one could just serve some static files to host it. This is definitely more suspicious than what OpenAI and other ML companies are doing.
  - archargelod 3y ago
    I can understand why openai requires phone number. With how much resources they spend on each prompt, they want to limit abuse of their systems. Also ChatGpt is not available in many countries and a phone number is reliable enough test of location. I am myself in one of these countries, but I also care about my privacy, so I use services that use chatGPT indirectly instead: https://you.com https://you.com with disposable email and https://phind.com https://phind.com
    - 3y ago

fire 3y ago

> Mojo is now available for local download – beginning with Linux systems, and adding Mac and Windows in coming releases. sure would be nice if this was front and center on the actual website; the download page requires the user create an account in order to even find out that linux is the only supported platform at present.

phillipcarter 3y ago

Really excited about Mojo, but not very excited about being fully closed source. I understand not going OSS right now if there's still a lot of churn expected, but I think that can be worked around: 1. Just because something is OSS doesn't mean the public is entitled to defining the roadmap or design decisions. If you set working norms up front and make it clear who has decision-making power and why, people will decide for themselves if they want to engage or not. A lot of frustration in OSS comes from lack of clear boundaries around how and why something evolves the way it does. 2. You can meet in the middle and be source-open. Don't use an OSI license, don't guarantee that you'll look at a community contribution, and don't guarantee that you'll engage on a particular issue. People can still benefit from seeing the source and deciding on if it's the right tool for them. I know a lot of folks rag on "corporate controlled OSS", but there's a lot of examples of that motion working really well for products. I hope Mojo does this eventually.

pavelstoev 3y ago
which is why we created Hidet, open-source deep learning compiler, written in Python and which can be easily extended to create all kinds of ML projects (wink, wink) with support for Nvidia GPUs. I am still looking for information on Mojo support of Nvidia GPUs, de-facto compute standard for modern AI/ML. https://docs.hidet.org/stable/gallery/developer-guides/hidet-script-dynamic-kernel.html https://docs.hidet.org/stable/gallery/developer-guides/hidet...

Exuma 3y ago

Is what they have achieved really that ... magical, that it needs to be a closed source project? I don't know much about python, but I suspect if someone watches the demo the methodology behind what they're doing is probably clear no? I don't understand the purpose of close sourcing it unless there really is some kind of moat.

gobdovan 3y ago
You can't have Python run that much faster without loosing lots of features. I guess if they open sourced it, people wouldn't be that impressed with what they implemented. This video [0] from the creator of Flask explains it quite well. Here [1] is Guido talking about Mojo being in early days and sharing some technical details. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCGofLIzX6g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCGofLIzX6g [1] https://discuss.python.org/t/mojo-python-with-c-gpu-performance/26993/7 https://discuss.python.org/t/mojo-python-with-c-gpu-performa...

lambda_garden 3y ago

Why are people so enthused about Python syntax? Some problems off the top of my head: - The lack of new variable declaration keyword makes scopes less explicit. nonlocal is not simpler in the large than `let x = ...` - The lack of multi-line lambdas is very limiting for anyone coming from JS, C#, Rust, Kotlin... heck even Java - The ternary operator (... if ... else ...) is needlessly different for other mainstream languages

mmoskal 3y ago
I agree (and would add explicit self argument, the fact that all your imports are exported and more) I think the point here is to reuse the Python ecosystem especially in ML.
kstrauser 3y ago
Throwing this out there: - I’ve used nonlocal 0 times ever. - I get that people miss them, but you can define nested functions if you want. Nameless functions are nifty, but I’ve never lost sleep over putting `def foo` in front of what would’ve been a lambda in other languages. - I kinda like the Python ternaries. Preferences are A-OK, and I’m not saying you’re wrong. Just chiming in that the things you mention aren’t universally disliked.
- chombier 3y ago
  > I’ve used nonlocal 0 times ever. Same here, but I got bitten by weird scoping rules quite a few times. Separating variable definition from assignment (e.g. with 'let') would probably help a lot in this case.
bookmark1231 3y ago
I concede about multi line lambdas but far too many languages take a “syntax is bikeshedding and unimportant” approach to language design. New languages are still using “&&” and “||” as if it’s 1975 and syntax highlighting doesn’t exist. Looking at C++, Rust and even Zig code is unnecessarily complicated for someone who isn’t intimately familiar with the syntax meanwhile for the most part anyone can understand Python syntax (well, at least Python syntax that doesn’t abuse decorators and obscure dunder overloads)

Rucadi 3y ago

I'll wait until someone uploads a docker image with code-server in it or something

ayhanfuat 3y ago

It seems quite exciting and all but I cannot figure out why they choose to impress people with marketing posts like "it is a billion times faster, oh no it is actually a zillion times faster" while their actual potential user base is waiting for license issues to be clarified.

danielvaughn 3y ago
Yeah I believe the actual quoted figure was "35,000 times faster than Python". It's a silly metric either way.
- ayhanfuat 3y ago
  They have recently published a blog series which started with 35,000x and ended with 68,000x [1]. The thing is anyone familiar with performance sensitive code is not looking at Python vs the other thing. They are looking for whether or not it is in the ballpark of C, Julia, Cython, Numba, etc. Those are the contenders, not Python. [1] https://www.modular.com/blog/mojo-a-journey-to-68-000x-speedup-over-python-part-3 https://www.modular.com/blog/mojo-a-journey-to-68-000x-speed...
  - luma 3y ago
    If you read the description, they started with 35,000x, then tripled the number of cores to get 68,000x. If your triple the cores and wind up with less than twice the performance, your scaling isn't very good.
    - vorticalbox 3y ago
      Depends on the task not all tasks scales linearly
    - fooker 3y ago
      It is very good, especially if you don't have to rewrite your code. Try to do it yourself (say take a merge sort implementation and try to make it scale), it'll be roughly this much after a few hours of work. Now imagine the compiler is doing this for you.

dang 3y ago

Related. Others? How Mojo gets a speedup over Python – Part 2 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37307260 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37307260 - Aug 2023 (63 comments) Mojo gets a speedup over Python – Part 1 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37294001 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37294001 - Aug 2023 (3 comments) Introduction to Mojo Language - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37200400 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37200400 - Aug 2023 (3 comments) Guido van Rossum feedback to Chris Lattner on Mojo programming language [video] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36389804 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36389804 - June 2023 (3 comments) A first look at the Mojo language. as easy as Python, as fast as Rust - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36289625 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36289625 - June 2023 (1 comment) Why use the new Mojo programming language? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35852734 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35852734 - May 2023 (4 comments) Mojo: The usability of Python with the performance of C - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35825399 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35825399 - May 2023 (45 comments) Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35790367 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35790367 - May 2023 (261 comments) Chris Lattner and Modular Announce Mojo, a New Programming Language - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35789890 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35789890 - May 2023 (10 comments)

qwertox 3y ago
Chris Lattner: Future of Programming and AI – Lex Fridman Podcast #381 [video] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36173382 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36173382 - June 2023 (1 comment) While it didn't get traction, it's a good interview which talks a lot about the language.
- hoosier_daddy 3y ago
  This was a great podcast and well worth a listen. It answers most of the questions I see folks asking here.
- osigurdson 3y ago
  I literally could not sleep after listening to that podcast. This is very exciting!

samuell 3y ago

Hmm, a bit of a rough experience. I had a few lines of python code, to count the fraction of A:s and C:s in a DNA (fasta) file adapted from [1]: with open("chry_multiplied.fa") as infile: a: int = 0 t: int = 0 g: int = 0 c: int = 0 for line in infile: if line[0] != '>' and len(line) != line.count("N") + 1: g += line.count("G") c += line.count("C") a += line.count("A") t += line.count("T") total_base_count = a + t + c + g gc_count = g + c gc_fraction = float(gc_count) / total_base_count print( gc_fraction * 100 ) Result: $ mojo run gc.mojo gc.mojo:1:6: error: use of unknown declaration 'open' with open("chry_multiplied.fa") as infile: ... "open" must be one of the most used Python functions ... :/ [1] https://github.com/samuell/gccontent-benchmark https://github.com/samuell/gccontent-benchmark

samuell 3y ago
Ok, well, found some disclaimers in the docs now: https://docs.modular.com/mojo/manual/basics/#python-integration https://docs.modular.com/mojo/manual/basics/#python-integrat... https://docs.modular.com/mojo/roadmap.html https://docs.modular.com/mojo/roadmap.html
mathisfun123 3y ago
man two days ago when i said their promise of compatibility with python was startup hype i got no traction. like duh they'll over-promise and underdeliver - it's chapter 1 of every single SV playbook.
- qaq 3y ago
  Have you looked at the team? This is pretty early in the development
  - mathisfun123 3y ago
    > Have you looked at the team? i am friends/former co-workers with several people on the "team". doesn't mean i can't/won't/shouldn't call out startup hype when i see it. and again: the criticism has been borne out because this comment chain is off an example of an epic fail. > This is pretty early in the development you don't applaud someone that says they're going to do something just because they're fancy. like is this even up for debate? at such later date and time where they deliver i will be first in line to congratulate them (maybe even as a user) but not until then.

mrcwinn 3y ago

A rant. I apologize. I try to avoid on HN and in general. Faster, yes, but at what cost? I'm so impressed by the Python community, but I'll never quite understand why they gravitated to... Python itself. It's unbelievable to me that in Mojo's case some of the brightest, most famous engineers have gathered to do incredible computer science work to improve the compute performance of a language that is fundamentally flawed in its performance characteristics for those very applications. It just seems like such a waste. How on earth did we arrive at this moment? Chris Lattner is right in his Lex interview: he had to accept that the community was already committed to Python and given that reality, that in turn pre-filtered his available paths. But my god, what if the community had gravitated to a better language [for these purposes] in the first place? How much further along would we be in our tooling and capabilities to deliver value? Chris, who I admire, loves to talk about language design decisions; loves to talk about how thoughtful they were in the decision-making around Swift; and then in the next breath says, hey whitespace-based scoping doesn't matter, don't worry about these things. Chris all you do is worry about these things, and worry about them for Mojo. He clearly has opinions that he masks about design choices Python has made; otherwise, after all, why the need to make Mojo? It just seems like at the end of the day, Mojo may be the most technologically advanced lipstick ever to be placed on a pig. (Edit for grammar, but clearly not for brevity or conciseness. XD)

geenat 3y ago
The curly brace community already has tons of great choices. Let indent people have their mojo.
- mrcwinn 3y ago
  I should have deleted that whole section. I know, I know. Sure, in some world, a whitespace character should dictate placement and lifetime in memory. That's my not preferred world, but also different spokes for different folks. :-)
mrbungie 3y ago
> But my god, what if the community had gravitated to a better language [for these purposes] in the first place? How much further along would we be in our tooling and capabilities to deliver value? Better in what regard? Performance? Maybe there are more important things than performance, like ease of use and barriers to entry. People in this space already tackle essentially complex problems, don't throw more accidental complexity in the form of "better" or more performant languages/APIs.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

awb 3y ago

Still not available for Mac with Intel chips unfortunately

zer0zzz 3y ago
Not available for anything but Linux x64

ThinkBeat 3y ago

I need a programming language that is integrated with blockchains and crypto coins, with quantum computing integrated as well as it being for AI and it has to be for writing running on the Edge serverless and databaseless with frameworks to fully support a decentralized solutions with and built in features switches to show which codeblocks are open source and which ones are proprietary. It must be strictly functional, not use too many (()) with dynamic stating typing and it must support google scale from the start and make it impossible to create anything that doesn't require K8, and most of all it must be even more AI

brancz 3y ago

Pretty neat! Tried profiling it since it aims for high performance use cases. Love how far we can get with standards in software engineering that we can just take this new language/runtime and just profile it! Wrote a quick blog post on it here: https://www.polarsignals.com/blog/posts/2023/09/07/profiling-mojo/ https://www.polarsignals.com/blog/posts/2023/09/07/profiling...

qaq 3y ago

Do not care about ML side much but having Rust like features with Python syntax will be fun. Plus tooling will obviously be top notch.

ShadowBanThis01 3y ago

Whatever that is...

coryaf 3y ago

I'm excited, but it's a shame that it's not available for Apple silicon yet. I really think this is the future of Python

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

teleforce 3y ago

I probably in the minority but for me D language is already the near perfect language to replace Python and becoming very productive and useful for data science and machine learning programming purposes. For data science and machine learning, they are two type of programmers namely A and B type, for analysis and building respectively [1]. The former are mostly analysts, scientists or mathematicians that are mainly non-programmer and the B are hardcore programmer that build engine, library, systems and sometime for real-time processing for example embedded signal processing. For the former, their programming bias are closer to pseudo code and naturally they inclined more towards intuitive programming languages for examples Python and Matlab. For the latter, however, they are mainly library and system builders with real-time bias and their favorite tool are C, C++ and perhaps Rust. Essentially, Type A prefer easy, low barrier and intuitive languages where real-time is not necessary, while on the other hand Type B required real-time functionality and efficiency regardless of language programming complexity. From the beginning of programming time, none of the programming languages can really satisfy both types, and that's the main reason Fortran, C and C++ based library are still being widely used by Python, Matlab and Julia, case in point namely LAPACK/BLAS, Eigen and FTTW. D, however, is more than capable of matching and replacing these traditional powerhouse libraries since seven years ago with its Mir equivalent and D should easily satisfy the Type B crowd [3]. Heck you can even write bare metal system without OS with it [4]. Meanwhile, writing bare metal in Julia probably not a very good idea [5]. The harder is to satisfy is the type B crowd and unlike Type B they're fast becoming majority users of the programming languages and this is manifest by the increasing popularity of Python language. For further reading, I'd highly recommend this Ask HN threads on Why did Python win [6]. This is where D language come into the picture, and apparently with D you can have your cake and eat it too [7]. D creators have cleverly make the language has default GC despite extreme disagreement from Type A crowd and they will let you know every time D is mentioned anywhere in the public forum. However, they're kind of missing the big picture since they are fast becoming the vocal minority and most if not all of their requirements can be met with D as proven by Mir [3]. Not only this, D creators also banned macro from the language so D does not have the same fate as Ruby where some Rubyists considered RoR as a ghetto although it's extremely popular and probably the main reason why people is using Ruby in the first place [8]. D seems to hits the sweet spot in becoming the Goldilocks of programming language and it's already an open and mature language that's included in GCC eco-system. Ultimately D need to appeal to the Type A data scientists and this where D creators has gone out of their way to make D as intuitive and Pythonic as possible. In their paper on "Seven Deadly Sins of Introductory Programming Language Design", where these Monash university professors analyzed these popular programming languages back in the day (1996) for their suitability in introductory programming language design namely ABC, Ada, C, C++, Eiffel, Haskell, LISP, Modula 3, Pascal, Prolog, Scheme and Turing [9]. It's a shame that Python is not included because back in 1996 when the paper was written it's still in infancy and not popular as today. Personally, I'd add that not adding a GC as the 8th major or deadly sins of the introductory programming language but it's probably just me. I'm pretty sure that D language authors and designers did not read this seminal paper when they're designing D (I know I asked), but it seems to follow this natural and universal guiding principles that I hope Mojo authors and designers, and other programming languages, will heed as well. [1] There are two types of data scientists - and two types of problems to solve: https://medium.com/@jamesdensmore/there-are-two-types-of-data-scientists-and-two-types-of-problems-to-solve-a149a0148e64 https://medium.com/@jamesdensmore/there-are-two-types-of-dat... [2] List of numerical libraries: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_numerical_libraries https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_numerical_libraries [3] Numeric age for D: Mir GLAS is faster than OpenBLAS and Eigen http://blog.mir.dlang.io/glas/benchmark/openblas/2016/09/23/glas-gemm-benchmark.html http://blog.mir.dlang.io/glas/benchmark/openblas/2016/09/23/... [4] Writing a bare-metal RISC-V application in D: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37346218 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37346218 [5] Running Julia bare-metal on an Arduino: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31481895 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31481895 [6] Ask HN: Why did Python win? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37308747 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37308747 [7] Why I use the D programming language for scripting: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36928485 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36928485 [8] Stop Designing Languages. Write Libraries Instead: https://lbstanza.org/purpose_of_programming_languages.html https://lbstanza.org/purpose_of_programming_languages.html [9] Seven Deadly Sins of Introductory Programming Language Design: https://users.monash.edu/~damian/papers/PDF/SevenDeadlySins.pdf https://users.monash.edu/~damian/papers/PDF/SevenDeadlySins....

fnands 3y ago

I had a quick look at it: https://fnands.com/mojo-advent-of-code/ https://fnands.com/mojo-advent-of-code/ It honestly feels a lot like writing C++ with Python syntax. Still a lot missing, but excited to see where it goes.