Mojo – a new programming language for AI developers
Seems like it could be interesting ...<p>Initial impression is that the animation of Mojo code vs. Python code has a bad UX.  Why not just show the code side-by-side instead of animating it and making me click?<p>Another obvious question is how is it different than Numba and so forth?<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.modular.com&#x2F;mojo&#x2F;why-mojo.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.modular.com&#x2F;mojo&#x2F;why-mojo.html</a><p><i>The Mojo language has lofty goals - we want full compatibility with the Python ecosystem, we would like predictable low-level performance and low-level control, and we need the ability to deploy subsets of code to accelerators. We also don’t want ecosystem fragmentation - we hope that people find our work to be useful over time, and don’t want something like the Python 2 =&gt; Python 3 migration to happen again. These are no small goals!</i><p>and<p><i>Mojo already supports many core features of Python including async&#x2F;await, error handling, variadics, etc, but… it is still very early and missing many features - so today it isn’t very compatible. Mojo doesn’t even support classes yet!</i><p>So I think the idea is good, but yeah re-implementing Python is a huge effort !<p>Though the comparison right below is notable:<p><i>A major goal of Clang was to be a “compatible replacement” for GCC, MSVC and other existing compilers. It is hard to make a direct comparison, but the complexity of the Clang problem appears to be an order of magnitude bigger than implementing a compatible replacement for Python. The journey there gives good confidence we can do this right for the Python community</i>