This blog post reflects on four years of using Jai, a programming language designed for game development. The author, satisfied with their choice, highlights Jai's strengths: speed, ease of use for complex tasks, and a powerful compile-time execution feature called comptime. They acknowledge some drawbacks, such as the language's relative immaturity, limited documentation, and single-person development team. Despite these challenges, the author emphasizes the productivity gains and enjoyment experienced while using Jai, concluding it's the right tool for their specific needs and expressing excitement for its future.
This blog post demonstrates how to compile C++ code using the Clang API, focusing on practical examples and clear explanations. It walks through creating a simple compiler driver, configuring compilation arguments like include paths and optimization levels, and invoking the Clang frontend to generate LLVM IR. The post highlights key components of the Clang API like clang::FrontendAction and clang::ASTConsumer, and showcases how to handle diagnostics and access compilation results. It provides a foundation for building tools that leverage Clang's powerful analysis and transformation capabilities.
Hacker News users discussed practical aspects of using the Clang API. Some pointed out the steep learning curve and lack of comprehensive documentation, making it challenging to navigate and debug. Others highlighted the API's power and flexibility for tasks like code analysis, transformation, and generation, exceeding the capabilities of simpler tools. A few commenters shared alternative approaches or libraries for specific use cases, such as libTooling for simpler tasks and Tree-sitter for parsing. The lack of good error messages from the Clang API was also mentioned, along with the difficulty of integrating it into build systems like CMake.
This YouTube video demonstrates running a playable version of DOOM within a TypeScript type definition. By cleverly exploiting the TypeScript compiler's type system, particularly recursive types and conditional type inference, the creator encodes the game's logic and data, including map layout, enemy behavior, and rendering. The "game" runs entirely within the type checker, with output rendered as a string that visually represents the game state. This showcases the surprising computational power and complexity achievable within TypeScript's type system, though it's obviously not a practical way to develop games. Instead, it serves as a fascinating exploration of the boundaries of what can be accomplished with type-level programming.
HN users were generally impressed with the technical feat of running DOOM in a TypeScript type. Several pointed out the absurdity and impracticality of the project, with one user calling it "peak type abuse." Discussion touched on the Turing completeness of TypeScript's type system, its potential misuse, and the implications for performance. Some wondered about practical applications, while others simply appreciated it as a clever demonstration of the language's capabilities. A few users questioned the definition of "running" in this context, arguing that it was more of a simulation than actual execution. There was some debate about the video's explanation clarity and a call for a blog post with a more thorough breakdown.
Svelte 5 significantly departs from its JavaScript framework roots by compiling components directly to vanilla JavaScript instructions that manipulate the DOM. This eliminates the virtual DOM diffing process typical of other frameworks, resulting in smaller bundle sizes and potentially faster performance. Instead of a framework mediating interactions, Svelte 5 generates imperative code tailored to each component, directly updating the DOM. This shift allows for optimized updates and reduces runtime overhead, making Svelte 5 applications more akin to handcrafted JavaScript than traditional framework-driven applications. While still using familiar Svelte syntax, the output is now a highly optimized, self-contained JavaScript module.
HN users discuss Svelte 5's compilation strategy, which moves reactivity out of the JavaScript runtime and into compiled code. Several commenters express excitement over the potential performance benefits and smaller bundle sizes, comparing it favorably to React and other frameworks. Some raise concerns about debugging and the implications for the ecosystem, particularly around tooling. A few express skepticism, questioning whether the performance gains are significant enough to warrant the shift and whether Svelte's approach will hinder wider adoption. There's also discussion about the blurring line between frameworks and compilers, and whether Svelte's compiled output still qualifies as JavaScript. The impact on hydration and server-side rendering is also a topic of interest.
The author dramatically improved the debug build speed of their C++ project, achieving up to 100x faster execution. The primary culprit was excessive logging, specifically the use of a logging library with a slow formatting implementation, exacerbated by unnecessary string formatting even when logs weren't being written. By switching to a faster logging library (spdlog), deferring string formatting until after log level checks, and optimizing other minor inefficiencies, they brought their debug build performance to a usable level, allowing for significantly faster iteration times during development.
Commenters on Hacker News largely praised the author's approach to optimizing debug builds, emphasizing the significant impact build times have on developer productivity. Several highlighted the importance of the described techniques, like using link-time optimization (LTO) and profile-guided optimization (PGO) even in debug builds, challenging the common trade-off between debuggability and speed. Some shared similar experiences and alternative optimization strategies, such as using pre-compiled headers (PCH) and unity builds, or employing tools like ccache. A few also pointed out potential downsides, like increased memory usage with LTO, and the need to balance optimization with the ability to effectively debug. The overall sentiment was that the author's detailed breakdown offered valuable insights and practical solutions for a common developer pain point.
Go 1.21 introduces a new mechanism for building more modular and extensible WebAssembly applications. Previously, interacting with JavaScript from Go WASM required compiling all the code into a single, large WASM module. Now, developers can compile Go functions as individual WASM modules and dynamically import and export them using JavaScript's standard module loading system. This allows for creating smaller initial downloads, lazy-loading functionalities, and sharing Go-defined APIs with JavaScript, facilitating the development of more complex and dynamic web applications. This also enables developers to build extensions for existing WASM applications written in other languages, fostering a more interconnected and collaborative WASM ecosystem.
HN commenters generally expressed excitement about Go's new Wasm capabilities, particularly the ability to import and export functions, enabling more dynamic and extensible Wasm applications. Several highlighted the potential for creating plugins and modules with Go, simplifying development and deployment compared to current WebAssembly workflows. Some discussed the implications for server-side Wasm and potential performance benefits. A few users raised questions about garbage collection and memory management with this new functionality, and another thread explored comparisons to JavaScript's module system and the potential for better tooling around Wasm. Some expressed concerns about whether it's better to use Go or Rust for Wasm development, and there was an insightful dialogue comparing wasmexport with previous approaches.
Zeroperl leverages WebAssembly (Wasm) to create a secure sandbox for executing Perl code. It compiles a subset of Perl 5 to Wasm, allowing scripts to run in a browser or server environment with restricted capabilities. This approach enhances security by limiting access to the host system's resources, preventing malicious code from wreaking havoc. Zeroperl utilizes a custom runtime environment built on Wasmer, a Wasm runtime, and focuses on supporting commonly used Perl modules for tasks like text processing and bioinformatics. While not aiming for full Perl compatibility, Zeroperl offers a secure and efficient way to execute specific Perl workloads in constrained environments.
Hacker News commenters generally expressed interest in Zeroperl, praising its innovative approach to sandboxing Perl using WebAssembly. Some questioned the performance implications of this method, wondering if it would introduce significant overhead. Others discussed alternative sandboxing techniques, like using containers or VMs, comparing their strengths and weaknesses to WebAssembly. Several users highlighted potential use cases, particularly for serverless functions and other cloud-native environments. A few expressed skepticism about the viability of fully securing Perl code within WebAssembly given Perl's dynamic nature and CPAN module dependencies. One commenter offered a detailed technical explanation of why certain system calls remain accessible despite the sandbox, emphasizing the ongoing challenges inherent in securing dynamic languages.
Summary of Comments ( 65 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43699564
Commenters on Hacker News largely praised Jai's progress and Jonathan Blow's commitment to the project. Several expressed excitement about the language's potential, particularly its speed and focus on data-oriented design. Some questioned the long-term viability given the lack of a 1.0 release and the small community, while others pointed out that Blow's independent funding allows him to develop at his own pace. The discussion also touched on Jai's compile times (which are reportedly quite fast), its custom tooling, and comparisons to other languages like C++ and Zig. A few users shared their own experiences experimenting with Jai, highlighting both its strengths and areas needing improvement, such as documentation. There was also some debate around the language's syntax and overall readability.
The Hacker News post "Four Years of Jai (2024)" has generated several comments discussing Jonathan Blow's programming language, Jai. Many of the comments revolve around the perceived slow progress and lack of a public release, tempered with an acknowledgement of the ambitious nature of the project.
Several commenters express a mixture of anticipation and skepticism. They acknowledge the potential of Jai's design goals, particularly its focus on performance and data-oriented programming, but question whether these goals will be fully realized given the extended development time. The lack of a public release fuels this skepticism, with some speculating on the reasons for the delay and whether it points to underlying difficulties in the project.
One commenter notes that the development approach, reminiscent of a single developer iterating within a game studio context, carries both advantages and risks. They suggest that while this method can foster innovation, it also raises concerns about maintainability and community involvement. This sentiment is echoed by others who desire more transparency and community engagement in the development process.
The discussion also touches on the challenges inherent in language design. Some commenters emphasize the difficulty of creating a new language that significantly improves upon existing options. They point to the complex interplay of features and the risk of introducing unintended consequences. The discussion of garbage collection versus manual memory management is a recurring theme, reflecting the trade-offs between performance and developer burden.
A few commenters draw comparisons between Jai and other programming languages, such as C++, Rust, and Zig. They analyze how Jai's features compare to these existing languages, highlighting both its potential advantages and areas where it might fall short. The discussion often revolves around performance characteristics, ease of use, and specific language features.
Finally, several comments delve into specific technical aspects of Jai, such as its handling of strings and arrays. These comments often reflect a deep understanding of programming language design and offer insightful perspectives on the potential benefits and drawbacks of Jai's approach. While expressing reservations about the prolonged development and lack of public access, many of these commenters maintain a cautious optimism about Jai's potential to offer a compelling alternative to existing languages.