He's already promised something too good to be true and it turned out to be a lie. From wayback machine https://web.archive.org/web/20190520021931/https://vlang.io/...: "(Work in progress) There's no garbage collection or reference counting. V cleans everything up during compilation. If your V program compiles, it's guaranteed that it's going to be leak free."
I was excited for that. We were all excited for that. Then it wasn't true. I would forgive him but he seems to be continuing.
Then he walks that promise back, pretends he never said it and suddenly invents this magical "autofree" system but gives no details on how it works. Rust was never that secretive, it was based on published theory.
He claims it removes 90% of reference counting but if that was possible then Swift or Python or anyone else would have done it.
If it was based on solid precedent, or there was any research, or he published anything about how it works, or he didn't take donations, or it wasn't advertised on the website, it would be fine. But that's not the case.
Let me get this straight. Someone is running an open source project. They said they are working on some ambitious feature. Said ambitious feature hasn't materialised up to your standards, and now you feel like you've been cheated or lied to?
So are we saying that open source programming languages are not allowed to make changes to their goals, features, or roadmaps?
And if they do make any changes, then people should go to the wayback machine and hold them accountable to what was in the past, and not what they are showing and saying in the present?
Seems to be very unrealistic, and more of a personal grudge or pet peeve.
I was excited for that. We were all excited for that. Then it wasn't true. I would forgive him but he seems to be continuing.
Then he walks that promise back, pretends he never said it and suddenly invents this magical "autofree" system but gives no details on how it works. Rust was never that secretive, it was based on published theory.
He claims it removes 90% of reference counting but if that was possible then Swift or Python or anyone else would have done it.
If it was based on solid precedent, or there was any research, or he published anything about how it works, or he didn't take donations, or it wasn't advertised on the website, it would be fine. But that's not the case.