←back to thread

ML needs a new programming language – Interview with Chris Lattner

(signalsandthreads.com)
311 points melodyogonna | 2 comments | 05 Sep 25 11:33 UTC | HN request time: 0.398s | source
Show context
threeducks ◴[05 Sep 25 13:23 UTC] No.45138284[source]▶
When I was young, I enjoyed messing around with new languages, but as time went on, I realized that there is really very little to be gained through new languages that can not be obtained through a new library, without the massive downside of throwing away most of the ecosystem due to incompatibility. Also, CuPy, Triton and Numba already exist right now and are somewhat mature, at least compared to Mojo.
replies(3): >>45138301 #>>45138354 #>>45138471 #
1. ActionHank ◴[05 Sep 25 13:41 UTC] No.45138471[source]▶
Would love to know which languages you learned that were so similar that you didn't gain much.

Just comparing for example c++, c#, and typescript. These are all c-like, have heavy MS influence, and despite that all have deeply different fundamentals, concepts, use cases, and goals.

replies(1): >>45139784 #
2. threeducks ◴[05 Sep 25 15:35 UTC] No.45139784[source]▶
I have learned a lot from other programming languages, but developing a new programming language and building an ecosystem around it is a huge amount of work. In the case of the Mojo programming language, it would have been more beneficial to the programming community as a whole if the developers had spent their time improving existing libraries instead of developing a new language.