4 ms·
It is a bit curious with the Mojo 1.0 beta coincidence, as Pascal was the other langauge with a highly readable and quite simple language combined with performa
by samuell 5mo ago
It is a bit curious with the Mojo 1.0 beta coincidence, as Pascal was the other langauge with a highly readable and quite simple language combined with performant compiled code without GC.
What it lacked was a modern compiler and stack. There is FreePascal for sure, and Lazarus is impressive, but it for sure has its baggage.
- vintagedave 5mo agoYeah, Python and Pascal have always felt like they share similar vibes, despite being massively different languages. (Ease of writing, ease of reading, good inbuilts, etc.) Mojo feels like a clean take on similar goals... it's essentially a cleaner Python.
- jibal 5mo agoMojo is faster than Python but certainly not cleaner.
- vintagedave 5mo agoCan you share more? I haven't actually used Mojo, I've just read about it, so I'm going on vibes (not AI ones :D) here. I'd love to hear your opinion.
- jibal 5mo agoMojo has both Python's def and its own fn -- two different flavors of functions. That alone isn't "cleaner". fn is there for high performance -- it's like Rust added to Python. Mojo is still missing Python functionality because it's early in development, so by that measure it's also not a "cleaner Python" ... and the parts that will never be added are because of performance, not cleanliness. Mojo has never been advertised as a cleaner Python so I don't know what vibes you're going on. This might be helpful: https://mojolang.org/docs/manual/python-to-mojo/ https://mojolang.org/docs/manual/python-to-mojo/