upvote

points

by Certhas1 days ago |
comments
upvoteby pjmlp1 days ago|
[-]
So basically Chapel, which is actually being used in HPC.
reply
upvoteby Certhas23 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I don't know Chapel in detail, I was more thinking Hylo. I don't think Chapel has a clear value/reference semantics or ownership/lifetime story? Am I wrong here?

The Mojo docs include two sections dedicated to these topics:

https://mojolang.org/docs/manual/values/

https://mojolang.org/docs/manual/lifecycle/

The metaprogramming story seems to take inspiration from Zig, but the way comptime, parameters and ownership blend in Mojo seems relatively novel to me (as a spectator/layman):

https://mojolang.org/docs/manual/metaprogramming/

I was sort of paying attention to all these ideas and concepts two-three years ago from the sidelines (partially with the idea to learn how Julia could potentially evolve) but it's far from my area of expertise, I might well be getting stuff wrong.

reply
upvoteby pjmlp22 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
You make use of 'owned', 'shared', 'unmanaged', 'borrowed'.

https://chapel-lang.org/docs/language/spec/classes.html#clas...

reply
upvoteby Certhas22 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I see, seems like the design is not complete and a work in progress (which is the same for Mojos Origins concept I think):

"The details of lifetime checking are not yet finalized or specified. Additional syntax to specify the lifetimes of function returns will probably be needed."

I think Rust proved that lifetimes, ownership and borrow checking can be useful for a mainstream language. The discussions in the Mojo context revolve on how to improve the ergonomics of these versus Rust.

reply
upvoteby pjmlp21 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Contrary to Mojo, plenty of people are using it in HPC, and is open source.

https://hpsf.io/blog/2026/hpsf-project-communities-to-gather...

https://developer.hpe.com/platform/chapel/home

See "Projects Powered by Chapel".

reply
upvoteby Certhas21 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
So? What point are you making? A different language with different design philosophy, has success in a different niche than Mojo is targeting?
reply
upvoteby pjmlp20 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
One is used in production already by key laboratories in HPC research, the other wants to be and is far away from being 1.0.

Chapel current version is 2.8.0.

reply
upvoteby Certhas4 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I don't think Mojo is targeting HPC at all.
reply
upvoteby MohamedMabrouk20 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
I don't understand this framing, so? Cpp, Julia are more widely adopted, used in HPC. it does not mean that people shouldn't start, learn new languages.
reply
upvoteby pjmlp19 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
In the LLM age, maybe the focus should be elsewhere instead of syntax.
reply
upvoteby MohamedMabrouk18 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
is that so? People are still reading their code to understand it and ask (or make modifications). even in the (LLM age) language design, readability is still as relevant as before.

I don't see the superficial comparisons between why this new Y when we have X are not really helpful. Languages and system got adopted not for their stated goal only, but for the underlying details capabilities, good design which translates to better user experience and ecosystem growth.

reply
upvoteby melodyogonna20 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Mojo isn't that far away from 1.0. Some point this year is the target
reply
upvoteby zzzoom13 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Is it? Spack has only one package that depends on chapel.
reply