|
| ▲ | Conscat 2 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| In the category of AI/HPC software Mojo aims to displace (which is my industry), I don't know many people who care that much about running Windows. The software I work on may only run as a Docker image or directly in a Linux/WSL. Mojo is hardly the only tool in the space (currently) lacking Windows support. |
| |
| ▲ | vovavili 2 days ago | parent [-] | | I'd put you in the "relatively niche and senior" bucket without even thinking. | | |
| ▲ | Conscat a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Senior is the last word in use to describe myself as a developer, personally, and I think it's hard to overstate the current economical significance of this software niche. Granted that it IS a niche and nobody would recommend Mojo for, say, kernels in video games or art editors. | |
| ▲ | a_shiine 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | I would put you in the clueless bucket without even thinking |
|
|
|
| ▲ | melodyogonna 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don't understand this premise. And the more I think about it, the less sense it makes. On the grand scale of things, Windows is the niche platform here. For consumer desktop use cases, it is king, but nobody deploys on it for the use cases that the first version of Mojo is optimised for. |
| |
| ▲ | andsoitis a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > On the grand scale of things, Windows is the niche platform here. They plan Windows support: ” Mojo has supported macOS and Linux for years, and Windows developers have been able to use it through WSL. Native Windows support has always been one of our most common requests from developers. Millions of developers build on Windows every day, across an enormous range of applications and workloads. We believe Mojo can have a meaningful impact across that ecosystem. Bringing Mojo to Windows the right way requires deep expertise in the platform, which is why we’re delighted that the Microsoft Windows team sees the same opportunity we do — and that we’re working together to make it happen.” —- https://www.modular.com/blog/modcon-announcements | |
| ▲ | pjmlp a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Many companies only allow for Windows computers, even if the servers are UNIX like, additionally as proven by NVidia and CUDA, Windows laptops are a great way to get students interested on the technology. | |
| ▲ | 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
| ▲ | dloss 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| They announced a partnership with Microsoft today. |
| |
|
| ▲ | solarkraft 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The niche is so big that Microsoft invented WSL to run Linux programs on Windows. |
| |
| ▲ | pjmlp a day ago | parent [-] | | We already could do that with VMWare Workstation and VirtualBox, since at least 2010. WSL could have been avoided if Microsoft had been more serious about the POSIX subsystem in Windows NT, or later Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications that was available until 2016. |
|
|
| ▲ | pjmlp 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| And Julia as well. |
| |
| ▲ | rirze a day ago | parent [-] | | It's a sad time to be a fan of Julia-- everyone forgets it's there. | | |
| ▲ | pjmlp a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Especially when it is actually successful at what it was designed to be, a faster Python for data science folks, having gotten enough researchers, more than most toy languages that almost daily drop on HN and Reddit. | |
| ▲ | archargelod a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | I was excited to try Julia, but then, as I saw it was an interpreted language, with bulky runtime, slow startup times and bloated library sizes - my initial interest quickly faded. For the same reasons I see languages like Python, Java, C# as inferior. | | |
| ▲ | markkitti 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | How is Julia an interpreted language? I sometimes wish there was a robust interpreter for Julia when the compilation latency is not worth the execution speed. | |
| ▲ | Archit3ch a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Julia compiles to native code, same as C++/Rust. | |
| ▲ | pjmlp a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Java and C# definitely don't belong on the same basket. And inferior to what, the crab? | | |
| ▲ | archargelod a day ago | parent [-] | | Inferior to languages that compile to native binaries, not burning dramatically more cpu cycles than necessary. | | |
| ▲ | pjmlp a day ago | parent [-] | | Showing your ignorance regarding Java and C# ecosystems and available compilers on that reply. | | |
| ▲ | archargelod a day ago | parent [-] | | I indeed don't know about Java, but with C# there are a lot of limitations if you want AOT compilation and you still get the bloated binary and limited performance. I also, personally, never seen a single project written in either Java or C# that distributes aot binaries. | | |
| ▲ | pjmlp a day ago | parent [-] | | You mean bloated as Go, the superior language? The limited performance of game engines like the one used by Capcom for Devil May Cry on the Playstation 5? Java binaries deployed in embedded systems by PTC and Aicas are AOT compiled. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
