1. 18
  1.  

  2. 1

    While it’s a little jarring to see loads of languages with few distinguishing features being born, it’s really cool to me that the tooling and state of the art for creating typed, compiled languages has gotten to the point where this is possible. More than anything, having a diversity of languages gives us an opportunity to explore more ideas and see what works / what is convenient for users.

    The concept of regions described here is quite cool, and vaguely reminiscent of Pony’s memory/execution model. Really well written post!

    1. 1

      While it’s a little jarring to see loads of languages with few distinguishing features being born

      I think Vale seems has more distinguishing features than most, so this seems like a poor language to make this comment on.

      The concept of regions described here is quite cool, and vaguely reminiscent of Pony’s memory/execution model.

      As far as I know Pony does not have anything resembling to regions, not sure what you are referring to.

      1. 1

        Wasn’t meant to be a discouraging comment. I think it seems cool and as I said I strongly believe experimentation like this drives the state of the art forward. There are just a lot of new imperative systems languages lately! I should have stuck with the purely positive language, and I apologize for that, as the last thing 2020 needs is excess snark.

        Regarding Pony, I was referring to its Reference Capabilities, which are type tags attached to data that can govern how it’s used, eg read only. Again, mentioning Pony is not a slight. The read only immutable regions reminded me of this. I think it’s a great idea.

        The article’s breakdown of Rust vs Vale was particularly interesting and makes a point of highlighting this feature.