FullGarden_S

C3 might be it because C3 has full C ABI compatibility so unlike most modern C-like alternatives, it checks out.

Programming is more engineering than art.

People tend to naturally develop feelings toward whatever they work with for a prolonged period of time and that applies to programming languages too. Mainstream languages for software development generally prioritize correctness, reliability, performance and other engineering concerns primarily, and then try to make the language ergonomic to the possible degree. In the meanwhile, those engineering judgements acquire aesthetic feelings.

When someone says that a particular language's code snippet is beautiful, they almost always mean that the engineering effort that went into the language's design that made that particular captivating expression or statement possible is credit worthy. Its more like a way to appreciating the engineering effort and not treating it literally as "art".

I would have agreed with the "art" part to a certain degree if at least a few mainstream programming languages are substantially more denotational in their semantics but unfortunately, almost all of them adhere to operational semantics mostly and that is basically "my" issue with treating programming as "art". Even when it is art, it can't be for software development(with imperative languages) in particular. So, to proof assistants, purely functional languages, Lisp dialects, there might be some "art" involved. And this is why the concept of "art" for programming is fundamentally fucked up. NVM.

From my experience, C3 felt more C-like(maybe because it has 100% C ABI compatibility) with its context-free grammar and the motive to stay minimal while Zig felt more C++ like due to the OOP-like methods and its ambition to be able to do everything.

Communication in this sense is pretty common in Mathematics and Computer Science and it becomes apparent when its related to actors and their interactions.

A good example is game theory and game semantics. The term "actor" in this context are soo abstract that we can pretty much attempt to implement them anywhere we see fit and that I think is the beauty.

This is great but I feel like the potential is underused.

I know its a lot of work but I think we all could desperately use an interactive LaTeX notebook instead of limiting it to only the PDF backend and this work helps a lot with achieving that endeavour. Though it'll be limited to LuaTeX, it'll still be quite something.

It does not seem unreasonable to me as well and I do not recall stating that being the case.

I only mentioned the YouTube scenario, but that's pretty much the case for almost everything. I'll repeat it again: it all boils down to the personal bias of the admins, and you seem to agree with that as well.

To be clear, I was not talking about Odin specifically. This is about notability in general.

>where those third-party sources are themselves notable and reputable (in the subject area)

this is where the bias kicks in. It would be great if Wikipedia's notability goes "All youtube sources are not reliable" but instead its always phrased like "Some Youtube sources are not reliable" and what qualifies as this "some" is usually decided by the personal bias of the admins.

You make it sound like you're confusing popularity with notability.

Unlike Jai and V, Odin has been in commercial use(JangaFX) for years now with several high performance computing products written entirely in Odin and the customers of JangaFX includes several AAA video game and VFX corporations. A lot of programmers not knowing or the language not being mainstream does not mean that its non-existent.

The Notability of Wikipedia is just the involved admin's opinionated bias. As simple as that. Its always been like that and it'll probably always be like that as Wikipedia seems like it isn't are capable of operating while changing that.

All the things you demanded require a significant amount of financial support to both create and maintain, and that is where Odin falls short. If you really do need all those libraries first thing in the morning, then forget about the language; it's out of your hands. You will always be at the mercy of the industry, and you will be forced to pick and use whatever language the majority of the industry is using while the industry keeps tailoring the majorly adapted languages to do things the languages weren't designed for in the first place.

Also, all the libraries you demanded have almost nothing to do with the language itself. Odin, as a solo project, lacks both the financial backing and the cult-like obsessive adoption within its community-both of which are essential for breaking into the industry and reaching the mainstream status. It's the industry's adaptability and the community's enthusiasm that determine how many new libraries will emerge for a programming language. Unlike modern languages like Rust and Zig, which have their respective foundation organizations that employ and pay several full-time developers, languages like Odin and C3 that stripped-down complexity and subjectively annoying features got no serious fancy features to market to the target consumers, making it hard for them to gain any exponential momentum. So, give the current state of things, we can certainly say that Odin will not provide any of those libraries any time soon.

Besides, the Odin developers are perfectly fine using libraries written in other languages, whether Rust, C, or anything else. If a library in another language works and will get the job done, re-writing it in Odin is logically pointless for getting the job done. The only people who seem to have an issue with Odin's ecosystem are backend developers. Low-level systems programmers and graphics developers have their needs well met(there are no built-in green threads or fibers but there is support for SIMD and all major graphics API bindings). Networking requires stable, secure maintenance, so unless someone from the community steps up to create and maintain an HTTP/3 or QUIC implementation, there will never be native HTTP/3 support in Odin. The same applies to Aerospike, YAML, JPEG XL, Slint, and everything else. Gotta see how things will turn out.

>He's quite insistent that Pakistan wasn't involved in the topical attacks.

Yes, just like how Pakistan was insistent about their involvement in sheltering Bin Laden. I don't understand why you expect any representative of a nation to confess explicitly to their crimes themselves but things like that just don't happen. Confession to their indirect involvement is the leading clue to majority of their actions and further investigation that will never be disclosed to public can only dig the truth.

>And indeed that the attacks may not have happened at all

that is very funny. That attack did happen and the attackers did send a message mentioning the name "Modi" to one of the survivors they spared. The tourists were stripped first to verify if they're circumcised and were shot immediately thereafter. I won't share further details but I ensure you, it really did happen and feel free to discard this as misinformation or dig further into it yourself.

I mean, Pakistan denies sheltering Bin Laden till date so its expected of them to deny any and all of their involvement officially.

I'm sorry if I was rude by using the term delusional but given their behavior, that is what it seemed like to me to expect a confession from them.

feel free to look up the full interview and get the context right.