Jai-Community-Library VS Vale

Comparatively

> Incremental rebuilds cause a lot of compilation problems, bugs, and errors. Incremental rebuilds are also slow due to the amount of in between files generated between builds. Jai will contain no incremental rebuild steps. All will be compiled in one fresh compilation. This means that the compiler will need to run fast with high performance. The eventual goal is to compile a 1 million lines of code in 1 second, but as of right now, the compiler can only do 250,000 lines in 1 second.

https://github.com/Jai-Community/Jai-Community-Library/wiki/...

Either ask very politely for years, or be in denial like half the Jai community that writes Jai but is never able to compile it.

Yes, there is a whole Jai community wiki made from half cobbled together knowledge (https://github.com/Jai-Community/Jai-Community-Library/wiki), and a super secret discord made for the super elite, non-compiler-having plebs are banned.

- Philosophical approaches behind project or lack thereof.

Now on the personal, subjective note, the more I look, the more I want to avoid V and get my hands on Jai [1][2]

[1] https://github.com/Jai-Community/Jai-Community-Library/wiki/...

Here's a community wiki that's been kept up-to-date https://github.com/Jai-Community/Jai-Community-Library/wiki

Also this one: https://github.com/Jai-Community/Jai-Community-Library/wiki

There is also the Jai community library, which contains pretty much all the information about the language currently. https://github.com/Jai-Community/Jai-Community-Library

Not to be confused with Vale[0].

[0] https://vale.dev/

The article says they created a deterministic hypervisor that runs all pseudorandom behavior from a starting seed to enable perfect re-playability.

But that's all we know so far. I'm assuming there'll be some sort of fuzz testing, and static analysis or some defining actions that your software can perform.

Honestly it sounds a lot like it has a lot of crossover with what the Vale language is trying to solve: https://vale.dev/, but focused on trying to get existing software to that state instead of creating a new language to make new software already be at that state by default.

Why go through all the trouble when you can do this: https://www.hylo-lang.org/ and not spend a second thinking of lifetimes? No, copies will not be issued unless necessary.

Or why not keep exploring this idea as well? More research-oriented than the first one right now, though, so take it with a grain of salt: https://vale.dev/

Another relevant language might be Vale (https://vale.dev), which is aiming for "perfect replayability": https://verdagon.dev/blog/perfect-replayability-prototyped

Interesting. Very low level though and C(++) centric. She there any thoughts on combining the hardware and OS features with rust or https://vale.dev ?

Use a runtime memory management solution that's cheaper than garbage collection (see Vale)

This seems like a tool I'll be using, and this is an almost meaningless criticism, but why the name?

There's already the Vale programming language (https://vale.dev/), but moreover, I don't get the meaning of "vale". You could call it something like Englint which actually hints its purpose.