Vale VS lobster

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.

I think lobster does this.

"Compile time reference counting / lifetime analysis / borrow checker."[1]

"Reference Counting with cycle detection at exit, 95% of reference count ops removed at compile time thanks to lifetime analysis."[1]

[1] https://strlen.com/lobster/

There is another language, Lobster, that uses lifetime analysis like Rust, but IIUC infers lifetimes completely automatically. It looks like the idea is still experimental - I'm interested to see how it goes.

I think the ability to open a window and do graphical stuff is actually pretty underrated in core language functionality. There's a few game-oriented programming languages like Lobster that put windowing and graphics in the core language functionality, and I think it's pretty neat. The biggest downside is that it's a lot to bite off, because you'll probably want to have standardized API functionality for a whole host of things like font rendering, image loading, etc.

The actual game itself, yes. Based on this open source project though which provides the language its written in and core engine tech: https://github.com/aardappel/lobster

I'm keeping an eye on Lobster though. It fixes most of Python's problems. It's way faster, has proper static typing, the import system is sane, etc.

Lobster (https://strlen.com/lobster/) appears to at least do lifetime analysis to reduce refcounting. I'm not sure about automatic interior mutability. I feel like there's a keyword here that can help find other compilers with similar features.

Also, can I introduce you to https://strlen.com/lobster/, a garbage collected language made for game development by (and primarily for) the one and only Wouter "aardappel" van Oortmerssen?

I would like to make it work to some degree like Rust with a borrow checker, and have optional static typing (with type inference wherever it can). Other sources of inspiration, lobster lang, and dart. It is going to (eventually...) compile to several places like dart (browser, iOS, android, linux, etc.). After I've created the AST, I've gone straight to code generation, because that's the easy part IME. But now have to insert the "middle" and do typechecking/borrowchecking/inference/other checking. This is for an imperative-style language.

Over the ~12 years of Lobster (https://strlen.com/lobster/) 's existence, features that were removed (in this order): * Lexical scoping. * Icon style backtracking. * Small-talk like syntax. * Dynamic Typing. * Multimethods. * Frame based state (like FRP). * Co-routines.