mun VS janet

Mun is a statically typed language that compiles to machine code with LLVM, designed to be hot-reloadable: https://mun-lang.org/.

Perhaps https://mun-lang.org? Might be a bit raw for your needs tho.

But that’s not all! In total, this release contains 111 pull requests made by 5 of our community contributors and our two Core Team members & Dependabot. Thanks for having our back! For a full list have a look at the changelog, but the main improvements are:

Whenever I read about Mun, I'm always really, really intrigued… Until I remember that it currently has no string type and support for one is not currently planned. That's a bit of a shame, IMHO, because otherwise, this looks great!

There's mun [1] which is statically typed and AOT compiled.

1: https://github.com/mun-lang/mun

From the reverse-dependencies of the salsa crate, the (archived) Lark compiler used it and the Mun compiler uses it.

I notice that there are projects like mun trying to achieve a similar goal, but I'm kind of curious why they are not getting much attention from the community.

Have you heard of https://mun-lang.org/ ?

It's an embeddable scripting language with the goal of being a Rust-like language that supports hot reloading of functions AND data. To achieve the latter, it uses GC'ed memory such that memory can easily be mapped when the memory's type changes.

It's still in early development but maybe one day will serve your needs :)

In terms of pure Rust engines/frameworks it seems the overall "problem" is lack of scripting, at least from my perspective. Mun seemed extremely interesting, but since even the project itself says "don't use it" I guess it's not a real option, and considering the amount of time we spent on the GDScript/Rust integration I'm a little worried that rolling something more custom would be even less efficient.

You might be looking for: https://janet-lang.org/

It comes with a build tool `jpm` which installs dependencies globally by default, but you can have it be installed in your project folder as well.

I like Clojure, but I never had any good opportunities to use it other than for a few small hobby projects. It is unfortunate that it is so huge with tons of dependencies and no simpler native implementation. I started looking at various LISPs and Schemes to find something lighter to use instead and ended up settling for Janet that I think is Clojure-like enough to be comfortable to use, but in a small native binary with no dependencies and can be embedded in other native programs. I am sure for big, real, projects that Clojure makes more sense, but for my hobby projects and scripts I do not think I will install it again. I am still happy for the things I learned from learning Clojure. It was a real eye-opener for an old OO-programmer.

https://janet-lang.org/

One might also check out Janet for quick scripting tasks.

https://janet-lang.org

Thanks!

I thought about another multiplatform, homoiconic, highly compact language: https://janet-lang.org/ (takes 803 kb on my machine).

It has no types though.

Racket is great, and if you like it you might find Rash interesting:

https://rash-lang.org/

Janet and Gerbil Scheme are also worth a look:

https://janet-lang.org/

https://cons.io/

Point here is that, for instance Janet language does not have cons / pair type but tuple (and so is lispoid, not lisp), but clearly this is sufficient for macros & hence seamless language construction: all you need is to be a lispoid although being a lisp gives another useful feature.

If this project interests you but is a bit more minimal than you need, the Janet language is a slightly-less but still pretty lightweight embeddable Lisp with a strong library and community: https://janet-lang.org/