Comments by "Kuhluh" (@kuhluhOG) on "Developer Voices" channel.

What baffles me around Hare is that multithreading is not supported at all, to a point where they explicitly state that you should not do this, are on your own and that the stdlib could possibly break from doing that (since it's not threadsafe). Did they even look at how computer hardware evolved over the last -10- 5 years? Or how hardware manufacturers say where things are going to go in the next decade? If this wouldn't be a systems programming language, fine, a higher level language can get away without support for it (look at Python), but a systems programming language?
8
and glibc is so not meant to be statically linked that it may break from just doing that (yes, I have seen that happen, no, I don't understand how) so, I would recommend you to statically link a different libc, like musl
3
@danvilela automate something you often do even if you end up not using it, it's still great for learning
2
@Masq_RRade yeah, but at the very least make the allocator threadsafe if you go with a global allocator design I hope Hare just uses the one from a libc (these normally are), but since it's a newer systemsprogramming language with a goal of being a C replacement, I wouldn't be so sure about it
1
@SaHaRaSquad well, there are already two projects I know of (Tigerbeetle and Bun) based on Zig which I doubt will die soon-ish (and with that I mean I expect them to still be around in at least 10 years)
1
tbf, code generators can make sense for certain things, like for example protobuf but other than things like that, I want to work on actual types as the compiler understands them
1
quantum computers replacing traditional one depends entirely on if we can figure out room temperature super conductors which is one of the projects which is always 15 years away like fusion reactors for many decades at this point (which in itself is a project always just 15 years away since the 1960s) so, it may happen but I REALLY wouldn't bet on it
1
@nanthilrodriguez well, C++ implemented this (heavily inspired by APL (with APL even explicitly mentioned as inspiration)) in its standard library
1
@makeitreality457 yes, right now, but if you create a language with the explicit goal of making it for the future, especially with the goal of it not changing anymore, you need to think (or rather guess) about how things are going to be at that point and if you think that this is practically impossible to do and pretty much entirely luck based, I guess you also answered yourself how likely it is for such a language to succeed
1