Comment by mawfig
3 years ago
I'm sorry if you feel this is a dunk on V. Having seen quite a bit of discussion both on hacker news and other places saying that V has improved significantly since Xe's articles a few years ago, I thought it would be worth while to attempt a modern evaluation of the language based on where it is today. Throughout, I tried to ground my review by basing it on the claims the developers themselves make.
Would you mind expanding on your later comment? While I'm not a Go programmer, it's pretty easy for me to see why it has the features it has based on their commitment to fast compile times and being easy to learn. V on the other hand feels like an incoherent list of the biggest buzzwords in the industry right now with no clear overall design.
Sorry, I didn’t mean to suggest that this article itself was a dunk. I was commenting on the discussion I see elsewhere on the language (including elsewhere in this comments section). The article itself is a good summary of the problems with V — mostly with its implementation which does appear shoddy.
V’s design address many things I feel are lacking whenever I use Go: nil safety, sum types, option/result types, mandatory error checking. I think V is best understood in the context of being Go++.
Having looked a bit deeper though, the immutability and generics stuff does feel a bit bolted on, so I do see your point.
> I thought it would be worth while to attempt a modern evaluation of the language based on where it is today
A good idea indeed, thanks for the effort.
Although I'm quite surprised why V has gained so much attention.