undefined | Better HN

0 pointsRochus4y ago0 comments

Maybe the author just likes to implement programming languages and sets high goals. All those who have experience with this know that it is a lot of work. Apparently, the author has been working on this for many years and has achieved a lot. I recently bought the Packt book; what is not clear to me at the moment is what are the specific innovations over the other already established languages. Thus, it would be helpful if on the main page of the language there was an essay on why the author thinks there is a need for a new language, and what the specific advantages are with respect to concrete features of the other languages.

0 comments

gus_massa4y ago

> sets high goals

The problem is that in the initial releases the "high goals" were listed as "features" of the language, not as planed improvements of the initial implementation. So even now when I read a list like in the article, I'm not sure which are already implemented and which are just wishes, but after the initial bad impression I'm not bother to check.

RochusOP4y ago

Problem? Is the communication not up to the author? And shouldn't people rather help out than just make demands on an open source project?

2 more replies

amedvednikov4y ago

> what is not clear to me at the moment is what are the specific innovations over the other already established languages.

I'll make it more clear on the website.

There's already a comparison to Go, the language V is most similar to:

https://vlang.io/compare#go

Quite a lot of improvements.

V is basically about having the performance of C, the ease of use of Python, the simplicity of Go.

RochusOP4y ago

Thanks for the link; that's going in the direction I was looking for. So could one say that V is essentially the Go the author would have wanted, and the new language is justified by the "~20%" difference, and an independent development is necessary due to the slow pace at which Go is evolving? So that would be a similar motivation as Nim versus Python, or Oberon+ versus Oberon.

The feature differences in list form are helpful; but the priorities and motivation for individual features would also be interesting; e.g. why is "variable shadowing" bad and why is the V approach better, and how can smaller runtime and binaries smaller by a factor of 100 be achieved with a feature set that is at least 80% the same as Go? Does this really have to do with the language definition, or rather with the implementation?

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

gus_massa4y ago

> sets high goals

RochusOP4y ago

Problem? Is the communication not up to the author? And shouldn't people rather help out than just make demands on an open source project?

2 more replies

amedvednikov4y ago

> what is not clear to me at the moment is what are the specific innovations over the other already established languages.

I'll make it more clear on the website.

There's already a comparison to Go, the language V is most similar to:

https://vlang.io/compare#go

Quite a lot of improvements.

V is basically about having the performance of C, the ease of use of Python, the simplicity of Go.

RochusOP4y ago

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse