Things might be better now, but the previous false advertisement makes it really hard to tell. For example, vlang.io claims no undefined behaviour¹, but with

    struct Foo {
        bar int
    }
    println(&Foo(voidptr(some_address_here)))

it seems to read whatever memory is at that address (which is UB in C, and V compiles to C, so...).

¹it says some overflowing can still result in UB, but that's not what's happening here; also this warning was only added in July.

I am not a "sleeper account". I posted a very calm and charitable take on my view, in it explaining that I understand OP's view. Nowhere did I smear the language, or troll, or do anything of the sort.

You on the other hand immediately label me as a sleeper account and a troll, for only mentioning a few links to a webpage. Although I can understand being defensive by default if you get trolled a lot, I don't think this is a good way to win people over. It certainly is off-putting to me.

-----

But anyway, content related: did Xe/Xena/Christine lie in their blog posts at that time? I've read other blog posts by them and those generally seem to be level headed, well written blog posts -- not spam or anything.

Next to checking out the Vlang's website, those blog posts were my only exposure to the language at the time -- as you can imagine for a new language.

-----

>> ...and then got blocked by the V team.

> This appears to be more trolling, and just distortions or lies, as a setup to unload more spam links and misinformation.

Is the image in the tweet in the last post not correct? That Xe got blocked by @v_language? Or is that not the official Twitter account?

You have to remember, I'm just an outside observer -- and all I see is a person testing the claims a language does, finding they are mostly unsubstantiated, and getting blocked in the process.