The V Programming Language

by 0x4542 • 7 years ago

191 181 7 years ago

gigatexal• 7 years ago

This sounds like the best thing since sliced bread language.

choeger• 7 years ago

Come on guys. I get it that everyone and their cat invent new languages nowadays. And that is a cool thing, do not get me wrong. But as a professional in that field, is it too much to ask to give just a little overview over the /interesting/ parts of the language? What is its type discipline? What data structures are supported? What is the execution/evaluation strategy? How about concurrency? Coroutines? Macros? Modules? The language design space has been mapped thoroughly in the last decades. Is it so hard to give a tiny X on that map?

andolanra• 7 years ago

The Comparison page is pretty illustrative here: this language appears to be an effort to build up a lower-level-ish Go (e.g. no runtime, no GC) with some extra features (e.g. nullable types, generics) and some extra safety properties (e.g. no global state, immutable-data-by-default.)

c.f. https://vlang.io/compare

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

The docs cover most of these:

https://vlang.io/docs

Also

https://vlang.io/compare

https://vlang.io/compilation_speed

fouc2• 7 years ago

Has it actually been mapped thoroughly? Is there actually a common language/terminology across Ruby, Python, Lisp, Javascript, Go, C++, etc?

I've noticed that terms & definitions subtly or not-so-subtly vary from programming language to programming language, so I imagine it's pretty tricky to come to any sort of consensus.

revskill• 7 years ago

How to download the compiler ?

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

It'll be available in June. Online playground in 2 days.

NikkiA• 7 years ago

You can't.

"Open source release in June 2019."

At this point it's just vaporware tease.

adamnemecek• 7 years ago

I don’t think it is.

sonnyblarney2• 7 years ago

Well cheers to someone making a compiled language that is like a simplified C/C++. Rust is great but it's a paradigm shift, and Go is great but it (edit here:) has a runtime which we don't have implicit control over.

This is a promising C-ish language without the cruft and easy foot-shot triggers.

Can't wait for the rules regarding packages/modules, how they are distributed, the clean and simple build systems, documentation constructs, and clean integration into VSCode ... and of course all of the key/default libraries we need to be productive.

Good start folks, looking forward to the next rev.

sesteel3• 7 years ago

Out of curiosity, what makes you think Go is not compiled?

sonnyblarney2• 7 years ago

It's my fault. Go is compiled, of course, but it has a 'not yet very well optimized' runtime which I don't immediately associate with compiled languages. I should have been more clear. My bad.

creatornator• 7 years ago

Go is compiled... It has a runtime with GC but it is definitely compiled to static binaries.

reggieband• 7 years ago

I know it is "yet another language" but I at least like the examples I saw. Very golang inspired obviously (even has the go keyword) but with some niceties (e.g optionals). Maybe when I get around to writing my Z language I'll use this as a basis.

sctb3• 7 years ago

Recent discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19086712.

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

Hey

Last time it was posted, it was a small page with some basic information about the language.

Now there's documentation, examples, comparisons, and lots of extra details. I guess that's why people started discussing it and posting on different platforms.

I know about the no dups rule, just thought it would be interesting for people to discuss.

sctb3• 7 years ago

OK! We've un-duped it.

root670• 7 years ago

> C/C++ translation

This is huge.

kyberias2• 7 years ago

It's vaporware.

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

It is. I'm super excited about it.

I'm wrapping up an article on translating Doom 1 to V. It will include generated .v code.

mhh__• 7 years ago

C maybe, but translating from (or even to) C++ is a genuinely company-sized effort.

UncleEntity• 7 years ago

Yeah, I'm kind of wondering if it does template instantiation or the C++ it reads is basically C with class methods?

hestefisk2• 7 years ago

I think this looks extremely promising. Out of curiosity, is there any support for lambdas / functional programming? Can I pass a function as a reference?

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

I haven't figured what I want to do with this yet.

Most like something like `users.filter(_.name.starts_with('A'))`

hestefisk2• 7 years ago

Closures?

isacikgoz• 7 years ago

The 400K compiler is interesting. But, does it help to solve any of my problems today? I would like to hear more about the reason of its development.

kyberias2• 7 years ago

What does [dupe] mean?

snowAbstraction5• 7 years ago

I think the intention is to mark this story as a duplicate of

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19086712.

wronex• 7 years ago

I'm curious. Why the short names such as .len instead of .length? Also, ui.WindowCfg instead of ui.WindowConfig? I think this would make we hesitate all the time. Was it .new_textbox or .new_txtbox? Short keywords are one thing (Lua's local and function are no fun) but abbreviated library functions and types are another.

snowAbstraction5• 7 years ago

For me I guess, it depends how many such abbreviations one must learn. 100 fine. 1000 too many for me.

lapnitnelav• 7 years ago

Agreed, predictability is huge.

I think our systems can handle an extra few characters :)

jxy2• 7 years ago

Why is this such a big deal? Is there really so much difference among ui.WindowCfg, ui.WindowConfig, and ui.WindowConfiguration?

As long as everything is consistently named within a framework/language, I don't see any problem.

krainboltgreene2• 7 years ago

Yes. The latter are words, cfg is not a word. Words are easy to google, say, pronounce. "shortenings" are up to interpretation, have no translation.

BonesJustice2• 7 years ago

I tend to agree. That said, I rather like V’s short primitive type names (i32, u32, f32, f64, etc.).

But why do definitions put the type _after_ the field/variable name? So many of your type names are the same length! Think of the beautiful column alignment you could have if you put the type _first_!

onlyrealcuzzo• 7 years ago

I'm guessing here, but I don't think column alignment was a consideration for the ordering.

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

V aligns your code automatically :) Also variables are declared with `a := value`

On putting the type after the name: https://golang.org/doc/faq#declarations_backwards

andr• 7 years ago

I love looking at new languages. People invent really creative stuff. However, my exploration usually ends with "this is great, but there are no libraries for it, so I probably won't use it".

If you are building a language, starting from scratch is the epitome of Not Invented Here syndrome. Build it on top of an existing ecosystem. Look at Elixir and how it builds on Erlang and interoperates with it just perfectly. Or look Groovy, Scala and Clojure to see what kind of range you can get from a single platform. With the exception of Go, every language that has become popular in the past 10 years, built on something else.

tombert3• 7 years ago

This compiles to C, which (I think) means it should be able to FFI to it fairly easily?

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

Yes, calling C functions is as simple as C.puts('hello world')

coldtea9• 7 years ago

If you are building a language, starting from scratch is the epitome of Not Invented Here syndrome.

And there's nothing wrong with that.

AnimalMuppet4• 7 years ago

Depends on whether you want the language to be used.

fogleman• 7 years ago

And Go put a lot of effort into the standard library by the looks of it.

yiyus• 7 years ago

The initial library was very based on Plan 9 and Inferno libraries. It was far of being a direct port (not even a derived work strictly speaking), but it certainly took a lot of inspiration.

andrenth• 7 years ago

Would love a modern programming language that compiles to Go and can call Go libraries...

Koshkin• 7 years ago

All I know is that such language would first be called “Go with classes,” then “Go++.”

fouc2• 7 years ago

That would be a sign of maturity in the Go ecosystem if a whole new language could be built on top of it - perhaps one that isn't C-like/Go-like at all.

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

The very first and ancient version of V was compiling to Go :)

I think this can be an option in the future. The language is simple enough.

mstade2• 7 years ago

With the exception of Go, every language that has become popular in the past 10 years, built on something else.

And Go probably wouldn't have half the range it enjoys today without the massive reach and coffers of Google. That's not a snark, or a critique even, just a reflection of the difficulty of breaking through in this space and indeed a comment to support your assertion that in order to succeed in this space today you probably have to build on or successfully interoperate with an already established platform.

If Go didn't have the backing of Google, I doubt it'd have half the audience it enjoys today; Rob Pike notwithstanding. Case in point: Plan 9.

pushpop2• 7 years ago

Plan 9 is a little different because it's harder to flitter between operating systems than it is programming languages.

That said, I'm not discounting what you're saying about Go's popularity either.

login102939• 7 years ago

Not everyone is motivated by success. Grigori Perelman?

IMO people interested in success should be suspect. It’s weird to me that people would go through life seeking attention for invention that will not last much beyond their death.

If anyone here believes their efforts at even a Google size company are forever: 80% of the companies listed as Fortune 500 firms do not exist anymore.

Other than a few key discoveries, for a variety of reasons, none of the work at those firms is considered of value.

c8g2• 7 years ago

point: utf8 (unicode)

robbrit• 7 years ago

Seems like you either need to build off an existing platform, or have a company bankroll it. Rust also falls into this category.

bunderbunder3• 7 years ago

It looks like V is built on top of the biggest ecosystem of them all: C.

From the page comparing to other languages, they claim "Zero cost C interop".

bartl3• 7 years ago

Yet I've skimmed the entire site and nowhere do I see mentioned how to use C libraries in V.

I don't have to convert C to V and then compile the entire V program, do I?

_hardwaregeek• 7 years ago

Except that's your specific attitude towards language adoption. And while it's a perfectly reasonable stance, there's plenty of people who see a language with no libraries and see an opportunity to build their own. Every language ecosystem has to start somewhere.

Also, Rust started in the last 10 years and wasn't built on anything. Unless you count LLVM?

bunderbunder3• 7 years ago

One of the main things that attracts me to non-mainstream languages is that they offer a chance to build some of the kinds of things I like to build for fun, without a bunch of killjoys nagging me about how $language already has $library.

Granted, there are still killjoys who want to nag about how $language isn't on the TIOBE index, but they're usually easier to ignore.

azhenley• 7 years ago

I’ve been working on a language that builds on top of Go for this exact reason. I want to use the existing ecosystem.

But a lot of people have been telling me it isn’t a “real” language and that I need to target either C or LLVM. Can’t please everyone, I suppose.

mrath• 7 years ago

I think that is a great idea. something like typescript? Do you have a repo you can share?

dan-robertson2• 7 years ago

To offer a counterpoint, I basically entirely disagree with your opinion but maybe we have different ideas of using something.

Most libraries aren’t really that useful in the long term (although the most-used are). Typically they will not do quite what you want or they will do more than you need and therefore what you want will be mixed up with a lot of other things you need to specify. In cases where a perfect library already exists for your thing there is a reasonable chance that your thing already exists, and otherwise just use whatever language the library is in.

Now there are some libraries but I claim that basically everything else you can get away without and just do it yourself only adding things as you need them. E.g:

libc type library is quite fundamental. Likely a lot of the basic stuff already exists. So long as you have an ok ffi it should be easy to add any missing calls.

HTTP client. This is likely to exist but also not super hard to implement. One can also skip this and ffi/shell out to curl.

Json parser. Again likely to exist and quite easy to implement.

Data structures. Likely to somewhat exist although anything missing that you want may be a bit annoying to add. Typically I think most projects don’t hinge on exactly the right exotic data structure, and if they do then they should be implementing that themselves.

E.g. yaml parser. Less likely to exist and annoying to implement but you can just use some existing program to convert to json first and then easy.

E.g. bindings for your favourite C drawing library. Probably don’t exist but hopefully there is an ffi so just do it yourself.

Libraries aren’t really very special and rolling one’s own isn’t hard. And even if you refuse that, you can just write part of your project as a simple unix process and call that from your python script with all the libraries you want.

Personally I see the lack of libraries as an opportunity to not search around for libraries or try to work out how they can go wrong or be forced to do things a certain way. Especially if the language is novel, it probably isn’t really clear how such a library should be structured. E.g. the reason that rust doesn’t have a canonical gui library isn’t that there are no libraries or no one is trying or no libraries exist but rather that the community in general are still trying out different approaches trying to find something that fits the language well. On the other hand the OP mentions the existence of a widget library for V already.

hderms• 7 years ago

Http clients and Json parsers aren't great examples because both should be about as fast as you can make them. Idk about you but I don't find it credible to claim writing your own http library or Json parser is a reasonable route to go down in most cases. Not to mention the opportunity cost of reinventing those wheels would be quite large.

ncmncm2• 7 years ago

The importance of libraries turns largely on how powerful the language is. For a weak language like Java or C, it takes a lot of library to be much help.

A more powerful language like C++, Rust, or Haskell can capture much more semantics in a library. This builds on itself, so that spending time optimizing a library is worthwhile if the library starts out more useful. Putting more work into a library benefits every user if the library can absorb the extra work.

Obligate-GC cuts library authors off at the knees, so otherwise powerful GC languages tend not to collect libraries.

TheAceOfHearts• 7 years ago

TypeScript is a good example of a language that received widespread adoption due to its ease of integration with regular JavaScript.

Another lesser-known example is ReasonML [0], which is supposed to integrate really well with JavaScript and OCaml. Based on my experience, it's still young with plenty of rough edges but it's very promising.

[0] https://reasonml.github.io/

staticassertion2• 7 years ago

It's interesting that you chose Elixir, Groovy, Scala, and Clojure as examplars - they seem like failures from an adoption standpoint.

Go, your exception, is by far the most successful of the languages listed.

tormeh• 7 years ago

That's not true. According to the Redmonk rankings, Scala is slightly more popular (based on GitHub and Stack Overflow) than Go. They are both solidly tier 2 languages. Groovy and Clojure are tier 3 languages. Elixir is about as popular as Fortran or Ocaml, which is not bad, but kinda niche.

slavapestov• 7 years ago

Why should the goal of every programming language be to become popular?

stevekemp4• 7 years ago

I find the same, but there are rare gems out there.

Frustratingly I saw a fun-looking language posted here before, which was a virtual-machine based system. It was small, clear, and had a good range of libraries and I'm damned if I can find it again!

rkeene2• 7 years ago

Probably Tcl ;-)

dunefox• 7 years ago

Pharo, Pixie, Pony, ...?

Solarsail• 7 years ago

http://wren.io/ Has been around HN before, as has https://fascinatedbox.github.io/lily/

Were either of these two the ones you were thinking of?

snowAbstraction5• 7 years ago

Why not leverage LLVM for doing stuff with SIMD?

Will the output to readable C always be available in the future?

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

Will the output to readable C always be available in the future?

Yes

theredbox• 7 years ago

I dont believe this is real. Sorry but maybe someone can decompile the volt app to see if this is any legit.

I mean if you are releasing such vaporware you should at least do it anonymously not openly like you do.

snowAbstraction5• 7 years ago

We'll see but anyhow it seems that some people like the language's features. Pony exists so why not this?

https://www.ponylang.io/

rubiquity• 7 years ago

Can you explain the connection you're trying to draw between Pony, a language used in production, and this one? I don't want your comment to be misinterpreted.

sdinsn2• 7 years ago

Pony actually exists, while this doesn't. Not sure what you are trying to say.

sesteel3• 7 years ago

If it works as advertised, it looks to be a boon. I hope we can commit to a full security audit of the compiler, runtime, and std libs. My trust is lacking lately.

coldtea9• 7 years ago

Github of compiler (not examples) or it didn't happen.

nielsbot• 7 years ago

The site says open source will happen this year

foxhill• 7 years ago

perhaps, but it’s all conjecture until it’s out there. i hope it’s real, though!

audunw2• 7 years ago

Looks very similar to Zig in terms of goals. I'm rooting for both, but it seems that Zig is ahead in terms of community. Would V have any benefits over Zig?

I think a "better C" is the biggest hole in the programming language world today. Rust doesn't do it to me, because what makes C great is that it's so simple, and easy to write a compiler for. Rust is a different class.

Y_Y• 7 years ago

Walter Bright will probably show up in a minute and tell you D is a better C. He's probably right too. But being the best isn't why people pick C these days.

I also object to the idea that it's easy to write a C compiler. A toy compiler might be easy, but a good one takes UINT_MAX man-hours at least.

billforsternz• 7 years ago

a good one takes UINT_MAX man-hours at least.

I think Walter could legitimately claim this is only true if your int size is 11 bits (so about one man-year) or thereabouts.

vips7L• 7 years ago

From what I've seen D looks like an amazing language. I've been particularly interested in the -betterC flag.

audunw2• 7 years ago

D is not simple and by default it relies on a garbage collector.

And yes, I meant it's easy to write a simple/"toy"-compiler. TCC is a good example, and I've actually used it for a real in-house project. Not every application requires perfect compatability and good optimization, and it makes it easy to get started on more elaborate compilers.

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

Yes, the goals are similar. I will add a detailed comparison to https://vlang.io/compare

Off the top of my head: simplicity, strings, no globals, easier allocations, automatic memory management, no LLVM dependency, hot reloading, faster compilation times: https://vlang.io/compilation_time

Arnavion3• 7 years ago

FYI, the Rust code on that comparison page is not very representative of how that problem would be solved today. (I realize you took it from a 2016 post, though even back then some of that code would've been outdated.)

- It uses outdated libraries - `rustc_serialize` instead of `serde`, and `hyper`'s synchronous API (which no longer exists) instead of `reqwest`'s synchronous or `hyper`'s asynchronous API.

- It spawns eight threads, whereas the Go example (and presumably the V example too?) uses eight fibers.

- A thread-safe incrementing counter would be better done using an `AtomicUsize` rather than a `Mutex<usize>`, in which case the entire `next` function is a single call to `AtomicUsize::fetch_add`.

A modern Rust example could either continue to use the eight threads, in which case it would look quite similar in terms of the length of the code.

But more likely someone writing the code today would use fibers via futures and tokio, which would not have the Mutex or "manually chunk the work among eight workers" stuff. I think that it would be a bit shorter and clearer than the current code, but I would have to write it out to be sure.

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

Oops, it's https://vlang.io/compilation_speed :)

BubRoss• 7 years ago

There was a language called Clay that aimed to be a better C and succeeded through design, though it is no longer maintained.

It had ownership and templates but was mainly meant to be directly translatable to C.

plainOldText2• 7 years ago

Creating and evolving programming languages is a difficult task. It also takes considerable time to write a decent set of libraries and iron out most of the wrinkles before it can be used in production.

As more people move into programming, we're bound to see more languages on the horizon. I wonder what the most popular languages will be, say, 10 years from now?

I'm personally looking forward seeing one language reach maturity – Pony – https://www.ponylang.io/ It seems that it brings some novel concepts to the table, one being the combo: statically compiled + actor model + high performance + capabilities secure.

jb3689• 7 years ago

Pony's memory sharing model used with Actors is really interesting. When I was writing in Elixir the overhead of deep cloning any message (or almost any - I realize large binaries are an exception) between actors seemed like a big limitation. I think Pony offers an interesting solution

I remember coming across some big systematic gotcha with Pony when I was learning though. It's been a year or two since I've even thought about it though and my brain is foggy. I think it'll take more adoption of both Erlang/Elixir and Rust for people to really see the benefits of what Pony offers. It's a really ambitious language for sure

plainOldText2• 7 years ago

Although it comes at the expense of better performance, not having shared memory between actors in Erlang was a deliberate decision, as it offers a few advantages over the shared model:

* More robust failure recovery, as actors can be restarted truly independently in case of faults

* Better distribution out of the box as actors on different machines can't share memory anyway

On the other hand, Pony does promise to catch certain types of errors at compile time, but this is hardly foolproof, as long running programs will still encounter hardware and runtime errors. But since these classes of errors are less common, one can choose to live with them.

Ultimately, one must learn to compromise one way or another. For now, I'm happy I can extend Elixir via Rust.

ouki2• 7 years ago

Which license will be chosen when it will be open sourced?

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

Not sure yet. I'm considering GPLv3 with the linking exception.

sansnomme• 7 years ago

Apache/MIT would be more sustainable as it will be easier to get companies to donate money and use the technology.

thefounder• 7 years ago

Looks very similar to Go(which is a good thing) but to catch up it needs a great std lib and great tools like Go has. I wish it would keep the upper-case/lower-case convention as well for private/public identifiers

sdinsn2• 7 years ago

V for vaporware?

orbital223• 7 years ago

Comparing the compilation speed of a non-optimizing compiler against optimizing compilers is very dishonest.

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

https://vlang.io/compilation_speed

None of the compilers are optimizing.

stabbles2• 7 years ago

I repeated the experiment with 200 000 lines of code, where each line contains an assigment (just a constant) followed by a print statement (printf / std::cout). Results on my Macbook Air are similar:

    $ time g++ cpp.cpp
    real 2m28,454s
    $ time gcc c.c
    real 0m7,112s

Compilers are indeed really slow.

FrankDixon• 7 years ago

I‘m not sure this will ever reach the light of day. It follows the same patterns as Eul did, another creation if the same inventor: - plenty of empty links on the website that lead to something ‚coming in march/april/june/...‘ - lots of nice ideas, but nothing to show for it

I wish the creator all the best, but Eul promised a lot, long long ago, and never delivered

mattbreeden• 7 years ago

https://volt-app.com/ it's currently released in beta for mac and windows

bartl3• 7 years ago

I can't help but wonder why Volt on Mac is 300kB and on Windows it's 2.1MB.

Scarbutt• 7 years ago

Who/what is Eul?

c8g2• 7 years ago

https://web.archive.org/web/20180403082331/https://eul.im/

previous version of volt

mises• 7 years ago

I'm pretty sure this is supposed to be the continuation of eul. And having used the windows beta, it looks pretty impressive.

muricula• 7 years ago

The authors talk a lot about how fast the compiler is. It doesn't matter if the compiler is fast if the generated code is slow.

stabbles2• 7 years ago

Debug builds in C++ can be slow AND generate slow code.

dan-robertson2• 7 years ago

Imagine the simplest “compiler” for python or perl or JavaScript that doesn’t compile anything but just interprets it. There’s a lot of advantages to not having to wait for compilation. One can write a large and useful program with reasonable speed ups just from stupid compilation as many programs don’t need to be particularly fast.

One can imagine modifying the compiler to output llvm bitcode. You now can throw plenty of optimisation at it for free (but you are now slower to compile). This may be useful for prod but I claim a lot of the time it’s still useful for dev to have a simple very very fast compiler. Think less about the time to build one file and more of the time to rebuild your entire tree (or just a file which many things depend on)

bartl3• 7 years ago

One can imagine modifying the compiler to output llvm bitcode. You now can throw plenty of optimisation at it for free (but you are now slower to compile).

If you look at the FAQ, you'll see they can do exactly that but using gcc/Clang, not LLVM.

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

Like the website says, if you need performance, you do production builds, which use GCC/Clang with -O2.

In the future V will have its own optimiser.

dboreham• 7 years ago

For lizard people.

openbasic2• 7 years ago

Curious about the GUI parts: Is it talking to X11 directly? What about widgets? Cairo, Skia?

ouki2• 7 years ago

From "Simple GUI app" example - "import ui // Native cross platform ui toolkit (uses Cocoa, win32, GTK+)".

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

Indeed it uses Cocoa/Win32/GTK+, and if you need drawing, there's a small library called gg. It used OpenGL, but in the future will also support DirectX and Metal backends.

openbasic2• 7 years ago

GTK is super slow. Do you have any intentions of using raw X11 or Wayland?

jhawk28• 7 years ago

It looks like a nice little language. It looks like Go influenced the syntax (in a good way). Based on the "concurrent" example, can we assume that it does coroutines instead of green threads?

Have you tried converting the C impl of the Computer Language Benchmarks Game to compare runtime performance against other languages?

miki123211• 7 years ago

well, I don't know why this doesn't have more upvotes. It deserves them. This is literally the first time I've fallen in love with a programming language. It does all the things I'd want it to. Has all the positives of go without most of the shortcomings, is minimal and understandable, disallows 10.days.ago style magic without being overly limiting, compiles fast and makes small apps, something I really want in the age of bundling Chromium and Node with every hello world, and has a native GUI, so huge potential for accessibility. The only thing unnerving me is that Volt, the only publicly available app written in V, doesn't seem to be accessible which might indicate the GUI is not native after all.

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

Thanks. Glad you like it.

Volt uses native UI, but the text content is drawn for performance. It will be made accessible soon.

dagmx• 7 years ago

How can you fall in love with something you've only seen described to you in platitudes?

zephyrfalcon• 7 years ago

There used to be a stack-based language called V as well... https://code.google.com/archive/p/v-language/

bvinc• 7 years ago

This seems pretty amazing. I'm really curious how it manages to avoid data races. It doesn't seem to mention anything complicated like rust lifetimes.

Also, what happens when unsafe C++ is converted to v, for example, code with iterator invalidation?

There are so many unanswered questions.

purplezooey• 7 years ago

If you are a V programmer do you have to go around at night and spray paint V on garbage cans?

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

Not required, but recommended :)

squarefoot• 7 years ago

Interesting! Any chances to see an ARM port in the future?

amedvednikov24• 7 years ago

Yes!

But of course you can already compile for ARM by emitting C.

atombender• 7 years ago

My friendly advice for the author of this project:

Release the code on Github. Just release anything, even if it's not finished. Make the code work first, then build a slick website where you brag about its features and benchmarks.

Creating the website first, before there's even anything to try out, is disingeous at best, and at worst it's leaching productivity away from time better spent programming. I remember how, as a junior developer, it was a lot more fun talking about how great my project was going to be, than doing the actual, hard work. But it does take hard work to bring something to completion.

You're doing the exact same thing with your chat app, Volt. You spent years talking about how great it was going to be. You promised features and release dates, then changed the release dates once you weren't able to deliver. Your current alpha release barely works and barely has any of the features. You clearly need some helping hands to implement all the features you've been promising over the years.

I'm sure there are lots of developers here who would love to hack on a new programming language or a chat app.

The V Programming Language

Related Stories