That is absurd. He's not saying "I have an idea, and with a bit of help we might reach extraordinary numbers", he claims "better faster leaner than everybody else".
Nice to see he's kept his word and following through as is the community. Really great and lovable group of folks. Sometimes there are cultural differentials, but everyone is really great and with a primary and essentially only rule of "be nice" - I think it's a breath of fresh air in this screwed up time.
It's not uncommon and no bad practice at all to fully specify a language before it is fully implemented. There were a couple of languages where the compiler took even many years to come into existence after the language was published, or was never finished. Other people - like e.g. me - develop the language specification and compiler in parallel. Just different ways to look at it.
How is it related to spec'ing the language. It's just fuzzy use of terms to appear extraordinary. That's all. Btw he still didn't answer my simple question, meanwhile everybody is commenting saying how nice the community is, how people should help instead of criticizing and deflecting the actual issue people had with the project.
You wrote a bit further up: "The problem is that in the initial releases the "high goals" were listed as "features" of the language". The "features" you mention are obviously the specification. Have e.g. a look at how long they specified Algol 68 and when finally a compiler appeared; CPL is yet another good example; actually at that time Wirth was one of the few who delivered a compiler simultaneously with the language specification.
I'd like to see the ALGOL group writing "we're faster and leaner than fortran" while writing their spec and no compiler to run tests against. I struggle to follow.
Something like this actually happened when they had to decide between Wirth's and Hoare's practice-oriented proposal and Wijngaarden's rather academic proposal. There was quite a bit of controversy about this, not based on true implementations. Big egos exist everywhere and in all times.
I don't have time to help every single open source project that makes bold claims. I also don't demand anything, I just moved V to my ignored list. It may be unfair, and I may take a look in a few years again if there are enough solid news about V floating around.
Which is done by initializing all values to 0. Probably not a good idea to do that for references though. (See also "no null values")
- No undefined behavior
`*voidptr(0)` is accepted by the compiler. Unsigned integer overflow is accepted by the compiler and UB in the generated C. How can V generate C code free of UB when it can't even generate C code that compiles all the time?
- Pure functions by default
Excluding I/O, one of the biggest sources of impurity, from your definition of pure is useless.
- Generics
You don't actually have generics, you have templates. Kind of ironic since Go has actually added generics before V has managed to get a 0.3 release out. The distinction is this: with generics the compiler is able to validate that the generic code type checks prior to substitution/monomorphization. With templated code, it's not possible to perform type checking until the concrete types have been instantiated. V implements templates with all the drawbacks including code bloat and inflated compile times that comes with it.
Besides the obvious trolling, much of this is your interpretation and what you want the developers of Vlang to say instead. Let's keep in mind that others can have different interpretations, opinions, or things they like to nitpick about too. The developers of Vlang aren't obligated to you or me in any way, so are entitled to type their perspectives on their website.
The real deal are the many users, supporters, and contributors of Vlang. Where on GitHub (which is easy to check), it has more than many other newer languages (in various cases, more support than a couple of newer languages combined). Those people are the ones that count, who are using and improving the language daily.
"You can't put the genie back in the bottle", Vlang is firmly on the road to success and more popularity, despite its detractors and angry competitors.
So no actual response to objective criticism just "my interpretation is things are going well so they can claim anything they want"? Wow, what a compelling argument you make!
If you want to look at GitHub, sure let's do that. I see perhaps 5 regularly active contributors, many more who seem to have left the community, and a downward slope of commit activity starting in April 2020. Hardly some vast hub of activity like your comment would suggest.
Given autofree has been practically untouched in 6 months with no major bug fixes to speak of, reality would seem to be that V is on the slow road to nowhere. At the current rate of progress, I doubt we'll see 0.3 before mid 2023 and 1.0 perhaps sometime in the 2030s. It's been 6 months since anything was completed on the 0.3 checklist:
https://github.com/vlang/v/commits/master/ROADMAP.md
Probably, it would be good to do other things than trying to troll or presenting distorted information. It is very easy to go to GitHub and check Insights (https://github.com/vlang/v/pulse). Vlang's commits and additions are comparable and on pace with other languages in a similar category such as Odin, Crystal, Zig, Nim... Check the GitHub Insights for those other languages, and have the truth revealed.
Maybe it's an impatient rival developer thing, but I'm not quite sure what your laser focused fixation with autofree is about. Its the V developers and contributors prerogative to work on it as they see fit. If you don't use Vlang, then why in the world are you so desperately worried about it?
> Given autofree has been practically untouched in 6 months...
A search on Vlang's GitHub for issues both open and closed shows contributor and developer activity regarding autofree within the last 6 months, to include the last week. Sample- https://github.com/vlang/v/pull/13823
> At the current rate of progress...
Can you show us the HN troll accounts and incessant badgering of the Nim developers, who started in 2008 and didn't achieve 1.0 until 2019 (11 years later)?
Where are the HN troll posts under zig1dot0 about Zig not being 1.0, despite starting in 2016 (3 years before Vlang)?
How about with Odin? Surely there are HN posts by odin1dot0, who is incessantly complaining to Odin developers and fans about slow progress? Since they starting in 2016, but have yet to reach 1.0 either.
Right, not trolling them, but have a vendetta against Vlang for whatever mischievous reasons. Is it jealousy over supporters, funding, or publicity? Who knows. The problem is the trolling is very obvious and excessive. Just give it a rest and allow the fans and supporters of Vlang their peace. Enjoy whatever programming language you are using or developing and don't sweat Vlang so much.