nballerina VS pony-tutorial

oh boy -- lot's of work ahead for you folks, best of luck! I'll be watching this project. We do a ton with GCP so when this matures we'll be looking at it more.

How do you compete with -- if at all -- with Ballerina lang? https://ballerina.io/

PS: This advice stems from my personal experience while building BallerinaLang. We spent the first two to three years working with our own bytecode interpreter before we transitioned to JVM bytecode. Our LLVM backend is still under development and has a long way to go.

Considering your rich background in C++ and Haskell, along with your interest in functional programming paradigms, I wouldn't necessarily predict that Ballerina will "blow your mind." However, you might find certain familiar syntax while encountering numerous "why?" questions.

Ballerina actually showed some innovative ways to do it and is an interesting language to keep an eye on... finally, Unison decided to focus on its cloud offering and seamless distributed functional programming. Also a really cool language.

Last week I found Ballerina (https://ballerina.io/) via a comment here on HN, which got me thinking that I've gotten a bit out of touch with newer/up and coming languages in development. My guess is that, if I missed Ballerina before a week ago, I've probably missed quite a bit more.

What have I missed? And it would be cool to see where people are finding these types of things too.

https://ballerina.io/ and https://www.asyncapi.com/ seem like two efforts to move in this direction a bit for web APIs.

Reminds me of https://ballerina.io/

... which looks actually pretty nice, but I suspect the name of the project is a terrible marketing decision that will hold adoption back ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I don't think that there is a book written about Pony, but the tutorial and the list of patterns (WIP) are all you need to learn the language.

[Pony](https://tutorial.ponylang.io/): actors, reference capabilities, object capabilities.

Pony is a relatively young but interesting language with capabilities-security.

Well, depends on how you define ownership. Pony 's type system has reference capabilities which let you define who's allowed to do what to a reference and part of it sort of deals with ownership (along the lines of "this actor is allowed to do Y to the reference, other actors are allowed to do Z"). You can eg. have methods that return an isolated value that guarantees that there are no other references to that value, meaning it's automatically thread safe. You can also define things as vals which says that they are globally immutable, refs which give the current actor read/write capabilities but can't be shared with other actors

The alternatives are:

- Division must be impure (because it can throw an exception)

- Division must be partial - i.e. return Option[Int].

Both seem worse compared to defining division by zero as zero. Coq, Lean, and Pony do the same. https://github.com/ponylang/pony-tutorial/blob/master/conten...