I have been following Unison for a veeery long time. Ever since those blog posts on Paul's personal website. It has been more than 10 years already so this is a great milestone. But I am just a bit disappointed. I love programming languages. I follow every programming language, even some you probably have never heard of. I have witnessed the rise of Rust, Go, Zig and others. At the age and level of polish that Unison has I have seen far more traction for those languages that actually have become something. I personally believe the reason is how hard they are trying to push their impossible "business model" by making most of the things going on on the ecosystem locked in to their cloud. I know there is a BYOC oferring but that isn't enough. The vibes are just off for me.

When it comes to the comparison with other languages like Zig, Rust and Go, I disagree. I think it's because it hits its """new weird thing""" budget really quickly with Abilities and code in a database.

The Share project is open source, in contrast to GitHub, which is also popular despite having forms of locked-inness in practice as well.

I'm saying this not to negate the vibes you feel, but I'd rather people try it out and maybe see how their favorite language could benefit from different design decisions.

Agreed. I want to build things that collaborate over the LAN if the internet goes away. It seems like the hash-addressed function thing would be a pretty nice way to do that: no name resolution needed, just talk in terms of hashes to whoever's in range.

But all of the resources available for learning the language are funneling me towards using cloud hosted infra that won't be available if the internet goes away. For all I know there is a Unison-y way forward for my idea, but it feels like the path is obscured by a layer of marketing haze.

I think they have other issues, for example, they have no FFI. I think focusing on the business is actually a pretty decent idea. Trying to make money will force them to focus on things that are important to users and not get distracted bike-shedding on things that I would if I were them (like typeclasses).

I for one am glad there is a commercial angle to the project. Done right, it means more hours could go into making things better, in a sustainable way. Also, having paying users provides a strong incentive to keep the technology grounded / practical.

Without the commercial stuff, Unison would be just another esolang to me. Now I'm probably going to play with it in upcoming side projects.

Yeah, the core ideas sound great, but if the only way code can be published and imported is via their cloud platform, that would be a hard pass for me.

Glancing at their docs, I see mentions of Unison Share, which is also hosted on unison-lang.org.

So I would appreciate this being clarified upfront in all their marketing and documentation.

Ah, I do see the BYOC option you mention. It still requires a unison.cloud account and an active subscription, though...

[dead]