3 ms·

What can you do in Mojo that you can't do in Zig?

• kstrauser 2y ago
  Pay a company for the privilege of being allowed to develop with it. It has a commercial license, where Zig is MIT’d. I haven’t written a line of either. I could see using Zig, but there’s no plausible scenario where I’d ever write Mojo. Weird proprietary languages tend to be a career pigeonhole: “you’ve been doing what for the last 5 years?”
  • thefaux 2y ago
    Weird proprietary languages _can_ also be much better for a particular task than anything else and can thus be smart business. Someone who will dismiss something they don't know on the grounds that is weird and proprietary is not someone I'd want to work with. But of course if this is how a lot of people think then there may be no choice but for most people to try and stick with the tried and true.
  • melodyogonna 2y ago
    Nobody is paying anybody to use Mojo, its main issue is cross-platform support, specifically lack of native Windows support. Like I always say, most languages start off closed, incubated for some years by a tiny group, before being opened. Mojo is no different, in fact, Modular have given a pretty solid timeline about when they plan to open source the compiler - https://youtu.be/XYzp5rzlXqM?si=nmvghH3KWX6SrDzz&t=1025 https://youtu.be/XYzp5rzlXqM?si=nmvghH3KWX6SrDzz&t=1025
    • kstrauser 2y ago
      Every language I've used in the last few years has been FOSS from the very beginning time that it was shared outside its original developers. A proprietary language is the odd exception, not the common case. Looks like I was wrong about having to pay to use Mojo itself. It's their "MAX" product you have to pay for, at least today. The language currently free-of-charge, although proprietary.
      • melodyogonna 2y ago
        MAX is also free to use even for commercial purposes (as long you're not a competitor)
• melodyogonna 2y ago
  GPU kernels.