3 ms·

> I think you are missing the nuance between the different aspects of using the Python Interpreter, and integrating new functions with Python What if I told yo

> I think you are missing the nuance between the different aspects of using the Python Interpreter, and integrating new functions with Python What if I told you I used to work at modular? What would you say then to this accusation that I'm "missing the nuance"? The rest of this is AI crap.

FrustratedMonky 1y ago
I think then I'd have to go back to your original reply, and ask what your point was. What is it you are finding objectionable? These one liner "doh, your wrong", isn't clarifying. Do you really think Mojo is not based on Python? Or they are not trying to bypass Cuda? what is the problem? The rest might be marketing slop. But I'm not catching what your objection is.
- almostgotcaught 1y ago
  > Do you really think Mojo is not based on Python? what do you mean "do you really". it's not. full stop. what part of this don't you understand?
  - FrustratedMonky 1y ago
    ? Are we talking about same thing? Mojo, the new language for programming GPU's without CUDA? The marketing and web site materials clearly show how they are using the Python interpreter and extending Python. They promote the use of Python everywhere. Like it is one of the most hyped points. I think you are trying to quibble with, does the new functions get compiled differently than the rest of Python? So technically, when the Mojo functions are in use, that is not Python at that point? Or maybe you are saying that they have extended Python so much you would like to not call it Python anymore? Like IronPython, maybe since that gets compiled to .NET, you disagree with it being called Python? Or maybe to use the IronPython example, if I'm calling a .NET function inside Python, you would like to make the fine distinction that that is NOT Python at that point? It should really be called .NET? Here is link to docs. You worked there. So maybe there is some hair splitting here that is not clear. https://docs.modular.com/mojo/manual/python/ https://docs.modular.com/mojo/manual/python/ Maybe it is just marketing hype that you disagree with. But right on the main page it says "Mojo is Python++".
    - almostgotcaught 1y ago
      > The marketing and web site materials clearly show how they are using the Python interpreter and extending Python. brother you have literally not a single clue what you're talking about. i invite you to go ask someone that currently works there about whether they're "using the Python interpreter and extending Python".
      - FrustratedMonky 1y ago
        From Docs, https://docs.modular.com/mojo/manual/python/ https://docs.modular.com/mojo/manual/python/ "This is 100% compatible because we use the CPython runtime without modification for full compatibility with existing Python libraries." At this point you need to either explain your objection, or just admit you are a troll. You haven't actually at any point in this exchange offered any actual argument beyond 'duh, you're wrong'. I'd be ok if you actually pointed to something like 'well technically, the mojo parts are compiled differently', or something. You say you worked there, but you're not even looking at their website. Creator Chris Lattner discussing why they used Python. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRcXUuQYR90 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRcXUuQYR90 Start at minute 12. "Mojo is a very extended version of Python".
        almostgotcaught 1y ago
        Are you even a programmer? Do you know what any of these words mean? > using the CPython interpreter as a dynamic library (shown as libpython.dylib in figure 1). They're embedding the python interpreter not extending it - just like everyone and their mother has been able to do for decades https://docs.python.org/3/extending/embedding.html https://docs.python.org/3/extending/embedding.html I repeat: you have no idea what you're talking about so in reality you're the troll.
        FrustratedMonky 1y ago
        You're really splitting some very thin pedantic hairs. You're problem isn't with me, you are quibbling with there own marketing materials. Go complain to marketing if they are using the words that you disagree with. Everything I've posted is directly from Mojo's website. You: "Well, technically they are embedding the interpreter, so all the surrounding code that looks exactly like python, and we promote as being compatible with python, and promote as extending python. My good sir, it is not really python. That is just a misunderstanding with marketing. Please ignore everything we are clearly making out as an important feature, totally wrong". They clearly promote that they are extending python. What is your problem with that? How is that wording causing you to seize up? I'm aware of what is technically happening. Where did I ever say anything that was not directly from them? Do I really need to write a thesis to satisfy every ocd programmer that wants to argue every definition. Were you let go because of an inability to think flexibly? Maybe too many arguments with co-workers over their word choice? Does you're brain tend to get single tracked on a subject, kind of blank out in a white flash when you disagree with someone? Actually, I'm kind of convinced you're just arguing to argue. This isn't about anything.

FrustratedMonky 1y ago

I think then I'd have to go back to your original reply, and ask what your point was. What is it you are finding objectionable? These one liner "doh, your wrong", isn't clarifying. Do you really think Mojo is not based on Python? Or they are not trying to bypass Cuda? what is the problem? The rest might be marketing slop. But I'm not catching what your objection is.

almostgotcaught 1y ago
> Do you really think Mojo is not based on Python? what do you mean "do you really". it's not. full stop. what part of this don't you understand?
- FrustratedMonky 1y ago
  ? Are we talking about same thing? Mojo, the new language for programming GPU's without CUDA? The marketing and web site materials clearly show how they are using the Python interpreter and extending Python. They promote the use of Python everywhere. Like it is one of the most hyped points. I think you are trying to quibble with, does the new functions get compiled differently than the rest of Python? So technically, when the Mojo functions are in use, that is not Python at that point? Or maybe you are saying that they have extended Python so much you would like to not call it Python anymore? Like IronPython, maybe since that gets compiled to .NET, you disagree with it being called Python? Or maybe to use the IronPython example, if I'm calling a .NET function inside Python, you would like to make the fine distinction that that is NOT Python at that point? It should really be called .NET? Here is link to docs. You worked there. So maybe there is some hair splitting here that is not clear. https://docs.modular.com/mojo/manual/python/ https://docs.modular.com/mojo/manual/python/ Maybe it is just marketing hype that you disagree with. But right on the main page it says "Mojo is Python++".
  - almostgotcaught 1y ago
    > The marketing and web site materials clearly show how they are using the Python interpreter and extending Python. brother you have literally not a single clue what you're talking about. i invite you to go ask someone that currently works there about whether they're "using the Python interpreter and extending Python".
    - FrustratedMonky 1y ago
      From Docs, https://docs.modular.com/mojo/manual/python/ https://docs.modular.com/mojo/manual/python/ "This is 100% compatible because we use the CPython runtime without modification for full compatibility with existing Python libraries." At this point you need to either explain your objection, or just admit you are a troll. You haven't actually at any point in this exchange offered any actual argument beyond 'duh, you're wrong'. I'd be ok if you actually pointed to something like 'well technically, the mojo parts are compiled differently', or something. You say you worked there, but you're not even looking at their website. Creator Chris Lattner discussing why they used Python. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRcXUuQYR90 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRcXUuQYR90 Start at minute 12. "Mojo is a very extended version of Python".
      - almostgotcaught 1y ago
        Are you even a programmer? Do you know what any of these words mean? > using the CPython interpreter as a dynamic library (shown as libpython.dylib in figure 1). They're embedding the python interpreter not extending it - just like everyone and their mother has been able to do for decades https://docs.python.org/3/extending/embedding.html https://docs.python.org/3/extending/embedding.html I repeat: you have no idea what you're talking about so in reality you're the troll.
        FrustratedMonky 1y ago
        You're really splitting some very thin pedantic hairs. You're problem isn't with me, you are quibbling with there own marketing materials. Go complain to marketing if they are using the words that you disagree with. Everything I've posted is directly from Mojo's website. You: "Well, technically they are embedding the interpreter, so all the surrounding code that looks exactly like python, and we promote as being compatible with python, and promote as extending python. My good sir, it is not really python. That is just a misunderstanding with marketing. Please ignore everything we are clearly making out as an important feature, totally wrong". They clearly promote that they are extending python. What is your problem with that? How is that wording causing you to seize up? I'm aware of what is technically happening. Where did I ever say anything that was not directly from them? Do I really need to write a thesis to satisfy every ocd programmer that wants to argue every definition. Were you let go because of an inability to think flexibly? Maybe too many arguments with co-workers over their word choice? Does you're brain tend to get single tracked on a subject, kind of blank out in a white flash when you disagree with someone? Actually, I'm kind of convinced you're just arguing to argue. This isn't about anything.