Hacker News Reader

Comment by mort96 | Hacker News Reader

There has been a lot of ink spilled about how V is not as advertised. I am not going to repeat everything here, but here are some articles you can have a look at:

* "V Language Review (2022)": https://mawfig.github.io/2022/06/18/v-lang-in-2022.html

* "V is for Vaporware": https://xeiaso.net/blog/v-vaporware-2019-06-23/ (and its follow-up, "V is for Vvork in Progress": https://xeiaso.net/blog/v-vvork-in-progress-2020-01-03/)

* This comment on Reddit: https://old.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/vq4ul...

There's a whole lot more out there too.

View on HN

The same good old 5 year old article that claims V's networking uses system("curl"), complaints that V doesn't run on every single Linux distro on release, uses debug builds with slow backend to measure performance, and complaints about V using git/make/libc and even electricity.

The 2022 article about type checker bugs that have been fixed years ago, and with false claims like the string.len one.

First sentence in the reddit comment:

> V initially made some promises that seemed completely unrealistic (automatically translating any C or C++ program to V)

lol

https://github.com/vlang/c2v

https://github.com/vlang/doom

Completely unrealistic while they literally exist and work.

The fact that these things were lies at the time should frame any reading of any current promises made by the V project. I have written the project off and am not aware of its current status, but I believe that its recent history (that article from 2022 is not 5 years old) should frame anyone's reading of current promises made by the project.

There were no lies at the time.

V not running on every single Linux distro on release is not a lie.

V compiling without deps is not a lie (cc v.c).

etc

The 2019 article is 5 years old. Easy to count.

To bystanders who are interested in V: I recommend that you read the articles (especially the most recent one from 2022) and alex-m's response here, and decide for yourself which side you find the most trustworthy. I have nothing more to add and will not respond further. Goodbye.

Yes and please run the examples from the 2022 articles to verify that these type checker bugs have all been fixed.

(Not that having type checker bugs makes a language a scam in the first place.)

@mort96

It's very unfortunate that you make strong claims like "None of the features which sound interesting actually work, and there's no sign that anyone working on the language has any idea how they'll make them work."

and fail to post a single proof of such features.

So, is the 2023 version also a lie? https://n-skvortsov-1997.github.io/reviews/

At the time I was able to reproduce pretty much everything that was said I. This article.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com