Mojo 1.0

ddayanruben about 3 hours ago 35 commentsRead Article on modular.com

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

89% Positive

Analyzed from 823 words in the discussion.

Discussion (35 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

redlewel•43 minutes ago

Don't see the value of using a language with a closed source compiler...

Much better options out there. Python already has libraries like Pydantic that offload performance to functions written in Rust under the hood.

my123•42 minutes ago

> Finally, we will continue to progressively open-source more of the Mojo language, as well as components in MAX that we have built with it. Our commitment remains unchanged – we will open source the Mojo compiler and toolchain in 2026.

mort96•36 minutes ago

It's categorically uninteresting until and unless that happens. Weird to release 1.0 without it. What are they waiting for?

embedding-shape•17 minutes ago

> Weird to release 1.0 without it. What are they waiting for?

Hmm, I've been under the impression that at one point they said it'd be 100% FOSS by the time 1.0 hits, but maybe I misunderstand/misremember the details. But I remember they'd said it'd be FOSS in connection with 1.0, seems weird to do it this way instead of waiting until it's all FOSS then cut 1.0.

redlewel•15 minutes ago

This exactly. Doesn't scream confidence that its still closed upon release.

bourbonproof•12 minutes ago

I think they are waiting for a wild success in adoption, and if that doesn't happen they can use the IP to pivot to something else without giving the core away to anyone for free/as open-source.

fluidcruft•28 minutes ago

People to tune in to the conference, probably.

pjmlp•17 minutes ago

C and C++ were closed source for quite some time, they still are in places like commercial embedded OSes and console dev kits, even when they happen to be GCC and clang forks nowadays.

Clang actually has replaced most GCC forks exactly because vendors can keep the fork closed source.

redlewel•14 minutes ago

Sure but at those times C and C++ had no immediate replacement, and if you were doing embedded C/C++ was your only option. The same cannot be said for Mojo.

pjmlp•6 minutes ago

In that regard yes, personally I think Mojo has lost its opportunity, but not due being commercial.

AMD/NVIDIA/Intel now having first class support for Python DSLs or GPU JITs for their APIs, and Julia as well.

fluidcruft•41 minutes ago

Their website has a banner suggesting news about open sourcing of the compiler at some Aug 18 convention.

oceansky•15 minutes ago

AI generated first image does not give me much confidence.

Lastest OpenCV 5 release notes also had a lot of LLMisms.

I guess that's the new normal. Still, I am very hopeful for Mojo.

redlewel•13 minutes ago

I know right? Would be better to have a banner with the language logo than some totally out of place aislop image, almost makes you think this is a random person's blog and not the official Mojo site

fwip•10 minutes ago

I believe Mojo has been primarily using AI-generated imagery of its mascot for several years now, which politically aligns with its pivot to being a language for AI development.

FrustratedMonky•6 minutes ago

Isn't Mojo expressly for building AI frameworks? It isn't really needed or special as a language by-itself. It's main purpose is to make it easier to program these high end graphics cards for AI.

So maybe an AI image isn't the worst.

jibal•6 minutes ago

> I guess that's the new normal.

Yes, so basing confidence on it is totally bogus. Such comments are cheap and add nothing to the discussion of Mojo reaching 1.0 status.

bourbonproof•14 minutes ago

I spotted the exact same thing with the AI image. makes the whole thing immediately feel cheap, it's wild

galonk•13 minutes ago

"Normal" keeps getting more and more depressing.

Did they think that image would make them look fun or interesting? Because it's exactly the opposite.

minraws•11 minutes ago

Why not now though? Why wait for 4 more months? What magic is there to hide in just making it source available at least.

alberth•about 2 hours ago

So is the language itself proprietary licensed, with standard library Apache 2?

Am I understanding the current state of things correct?

xiphias2•32 minutes ago

Mojo may be interesting to me, but they should really split it from Max, which is some closed stuff I'm not interested in.

They should show some performance comparisions between PyTorch and Mojo, PyTorch+kernel compilation + Triton vs Mojo, ThunderKittens vs Mojo.

embedding-shape•15 minutes ago

> They should show some performance comparisions between PyTorch and Mojo, PyTorch+kernel compilation + Triton vs Mojo, ThunderKittens vs Mojo.

The fact that they release 1.0 without doing this, I think says a lot. I personally haven't even started looking into Mojo because of the closed source stuff, but usually you can tell what's going on by looking for what's obviously missing.

perarneng•38 minutes ago

The main downside is that usually I only choose languages that the LLM is extremely good at. (however I avoid dynamically typed).

But I hope they succeed, it's a very interesting approach. Then I will jump on it later on. S

nylonstrung•4 minutes ago

The premise of Mojo used to be that it was a superset of Python so in theory LLMs would benefit from that but I'm not sure how much divergence there's been

oceansky•13 minutes ago

Are there any benchmarks on which languages models perform best?

charlieyu1•41 minutes ago

Interesting. Heard about Mojo a few years now, never really tried it. My Python brain cannot really write C++ or Rust but still need the performance.

seanw444•28 minutes ago

You may have heard of it already, but Nim has existed in this space for some time.

mathverse•13 minutes ago

Nim could do better with more than just 1 or 2 brilliant developers

beanjuiceII•40 minutes ago

never has their been a language release so uninspiring

melodyogonna•about 2 hours ago

Hurray!

mono442•about 1 hour ago

Creating a new language in the age of AI seems kind of pointless. I don't write code by hand anymore, I only review it and I prefer it to be in a language which I already know since investing time in learning another language doesn't make sense at this point.

nylonstrung•2 minutes ago

Do you know CUDA or Triton? The point of Mojo was to replace GPU kernel programming langs with a Pythonic one that was more familiar

catoc•9 minutes ago

Pointless? If compiled mojo is faster, more memory-safe, and more hardware independent, that doesn’t seem pointless at all to me.

(And now in the age of LLMs, the barriers to get started with a new programming language are lower than ever)

tfrancisl•about 1 hour ago

this language predates the rise of "AI" (you probably mean harnessed LLMs, but I'll forgive you) by several years. This is the 1.0 release.

winding•9 minutes ago

This is the team behind MLIR, they have been in this field for 10 years or so.