←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: 0.402s | source
Show context
seabrookmx ◴[06 Sep 25 01:09 UTC] No.45145617[source]▶
The mojo faq talks about the language as if it's a strict superset (or aiming to be) of Python. Or that mojo "is" Python.

Yet the roadmap says:

> As Mojo matures through phase 3, we believe Mojo will become increasingly compatible with Python code and deeply familiar to Python users, except more efficient, powerful, coherent, and safe. Mojo may or may not evolve into a full superset of Python, and it's okay if it doesn't.

This is incredibly confusing. If it's _not_ aiming for Python compatibility, why are we talking about Python at all?

Also, is anyone actually considering using an emoji as a file extension?

replies(2): >>45145697 #>>45148589 #
pansa2 ◴[06 Sep 25 01:22 UTC] No.45145697[source]▶
AFAICT Mojo has (or plans to have) Python-like syntax and easy interop with Python.

I’m not sure it’s any more Python-like than that - the similarity to Python seems to be heavily overstated for marketing reasons.

replies(1): >>45146997 #
1. itsn0tm3 ◴[06 Sep 25 06:05 UTC] No.45146997[source]▶
I‘m pretty sure in their early communications the stated very clearly that Mojo is going to be a clear superset of Python. Seems like they paddled back a bit in that regard.
replies(1): >>45147121 #
2. davidatbu ◴[06 Sep 25 06:32 UTC] No.45147121[source]▶
Yeah this is slightly confusing for me as well. Even in this very podcast, being a superset of Python was mentioned as a goal (albeit a long term one).