5 ms·
The first release was just Go's parser ripped out and bolted onto a barebones first year of college level compiler, and touted as "safer than Rust", "compiles i
by novacrazy 19d ago
The first release was just Go's parser ripped out and bolted onto a barebones first year of college level compiler, and touted as "safer than Rust", "compiles in milliseconds", etc. but didn't even have real type-checking at the time, nor did it free memory, and many other basic functionality. Furthermore, I vividly remember the author's Patreon advertised at the top of the page back then, and for a while he raked in a couple thousand dollars a month for it.
However, over the years some actually talented people (and nowadays probably LLMs) have somehow sort of fixed most of the biggest warts, but it's still nowhere near what it advertised in that first release.
- morpheos137 19d agoLol this is interesting. If you want to make money you can "invent" a language. With LLMs you could probably make it pretty decent too.
- giancarlostoro 19d agoWhat's wild is I was looking at the language's home page again, and looking to find their GitHub, the first GitHub link I noticed, is the GitHub sponsors link. I don't mind supporting a project like this, but this is a bit excessive. Was it really Go's parser? That wouldn't surprise me, but also that kind of makes sense to me why it looked a bit 'familiar' in terms of syntax. It's definitely been "alpha" tier for a while, which it doesnt help that the developer doesn't outline any sort of stability that I can recall (back then at least) which imho if you're publishing a language, you should let the reader know.
- amedvednikov 18d agoNo, it wasn't Go's parser. That's easy to check.
- torstenvl 19d agoCan you explain what you mean by this? They haven't had a first release yet. They're still in beta.
- novacrazy 19d agoThat's being pedantic. The first public announcement was many years ago.
- torstenvl 18d agoIt appears you're calling something a scam because an early alpha version was early alpha quality. If so, that would be unprofessional and inflammatory. I'm open to being wrong. So again, can you explain what you mean?
- novacrazy 18d agoI have this amazing new thing I'm making, nothing like it, better than everything else. Here's a prototype that does none of that and is _barely_ functional. Care to invest $2000? If so, do I have a bridge to show you...
- wk_end 18d agoIf I go to the vlang releases page, I see literally hundreds of releases https://github.com/vlang/v/releases https://github.com/vlang/v/releases They haven't had a stable 1.0 release yet, but they've had many pre-1.0 releases. It's not some personal experiment that's been sitting in the dev's Github that people are piling onto; the author has gone out of their way to promote it, beg for donations, and lash out at any criticisms. The issue has never been the quality of the language per se, the issue has been 1) wildly misrepresenting the quality of the language in the present tense; 2) not even having any kind of a realistic roadmap towards achieving the kind of outsized and implausible claims about the quality of the language; and 3) using these outsized, implausible misrepresentations as a way of soliciting hype and funding for the author.
- torstenvl 18d agoThose comments may be fair. Defamation is not.
- 18d ago
- 0x457 18d agoCan't have use-after-free errors if you never free.