oneseven
3 days ago
What I really want to see from a "*-programming-language" post on HN is _why_. Why Lily?
keychera
3 days ago
I am curious as well. some past readme has Why sections and I am not sure why they are removed/changed
this have "Why" section https://gitlab.com/FascinatedBox/lily/-/blob/d3ace2907747106...
this have "How Lily stands out from other languages:" section https://gitlab.com/FascinatedBox/lily/-/blob/785a88534cced53...
andyferris
3 days ago
The README on gitlab at least has a sentence or two on that: https://gitlab.com/FascinatedBox/lily
> An interpreted language with a focus on expressiveness and type safety
Personally I think typed scripting languages could be the future. They should support AOT compilation where necessary.
bonesss
2 days ago
F# and C# are typed scripting languages. F# is quite similar to python in script form (.fsx), and has OCamls expressiveness, exhaustive pattern matching, and type inference. That results in highly expressive, terse, and ergonomic domain code.
The .Net VM now supports AOT compilation.
The future is now-ish :)
keyle
3 days ago
Why do you think that's the future?
Isn't a waste to essentially reinterpret an entire program that may be run 5000 times a day?
AOT compilation, how is that different than make && run?
At some point, you have a compiled language, if it's quick to compile, you're doing the AOT yourself, the scripting is an illusion. Pun intended.
nine_k
3 days ago
Isn't it a waste to run a test suite for a program that would run 1M times a day in production?
The key adjective here is successfully run. You want to detect any errors as early as possible. Ideally even at the early stages of writing the script, when a typechecker is already able to point at certain errors, and thus help avoid missteps in further design.
Syzygies
2 days ago
> Isn't a waste to essentially reinterpret an entire program that may be run 5000 times a day?
This is a dated prejudice that I shared.
To get started coding with AI I made a dozen language comparison project for a toy math problem. F# floored me with how fast it was, nearly edging out C and Rust on my leaderboard, twice as fast as OCaml, and faster than various compiled languages.
Compiling could in principle be fastest, if we had compilers that profiled hours of execution before optimizing code, and only then for "stable" problems. No one writes a compiler like this. In practice, Just In Time interpreters are getting all the love, and it shows. They adapt to the computation. My dated prejudice did not allow for this.
nofriend
3 days ago
a statically typed aot compiled scripting language is... not
LoganDark
3 days ago
Luau gets pretty close to statically typed and AOT compiled now. It's still a scripting language.
Even C or Rust can be a scripting language. You just integrate the toolchain to your app, same as every other scripting language.
mastermage
3 days ago
+1 for Luau which is just realy good.
satvikpendem
3 days ago
I script with Rust via cargo-script, it works great. Scripting is a task for when you want to achieve something in one file instead of a full blown application. It is not about the language, you can script in C or assembly if you so chose.
nine_k
3 days ago
"Scripting" is a role: an embedded, human-friendly, compact language, also suitable for interactive work / REPL.
(Laugh all you want, but Haskell has a rather nice REPL, and can work as a scripting language.)
EagnaIonat
3 days ago
> why
Building a program language is like poetry. Everyone does it at some point, just most of us know never to share it.
saghm
2 days ago
That just moves the question to "why is this one being shared" then. I don't think "because the authors didn't know better than to avoid sharing it like 'most of us'" is a particularly good answer.
paulddraper
3 days ago
From the link:
> Key features of Lily:
> Built-in template mode
> Embed/extend in C
> Single-inheritance classes
> Exceptions
> Generics
> Algebraic data types (with Option and Result predefined).
andsoitis
3 days ago
That’s what. Not why.
nine_k
3 days ago
The why: because Lua, Python, JavaScript, Janet, etc lack many or all these features. And each of these features is known to make life easier for a human programmer.
dismalaf
3 days ago
Looking through that list of features, Ruby (the dynamic language I know best) has all but 1 built-in (and the other can be added with Gems). I'm guessing Python probably has them all too (but I don't know Python that well). They're pretty common. So the why still isn't clear.
paulddraper
2 days ago
Tell me more about Ruby generics….
dismalaf
2 days ago
Want to split hairs eh?
Duck typing achieves the same thing as "generics", just at runtime vs. compile time.
paulddraper
2 days ago
Generics are implicitly compile time checks.
It’s a willful misinterpretation to read otherwise.
nine_k
3 days ago
Is Ruby easy to embed in a C program?
dismalaf
3 days ago
Yes -> https://mruby.org
It's also incredibly easy to extend the main Ruby implementation with C, C++, Odin, Zig, Rust, Fortran, etc... Literally a few lines.
vidarh
2 days ago
The main Ruby implementation is also fairly easy to embed. It's just not easy to embed multiple MRI ruby instances in a single application, and it's also a lot bigger than mruby.
debugnik
3 days ago
RPG Maker used to embed Ruby before it was cool (and before they switched to JS for web support).
bandrami
3 days ago
That was originally the point of Ruby
user
3 days ago
paulddraper
3 days ago
The reason it exists is to provide those features when programming computers.
poulpy123
2 days ago
99.9% of the time it will be "just because"