Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | keychera's commentslogin

I enjoyed the "Coming from Clojure" section. I guess there seems to be more differences not yet outlined there. One that I spotted is that destructuring is also really different but not mentioned there.

I also tried the the example destructuring from the tour page and these below doesn't run correctly:

[let #[a b c] #[1 2 3]] ; this doesnt compile

[let {name age} {:name "Loon" :age 1}]

[println age] ; age unbounded


I am curious as well. some past readme has Why sections and I am not sure why they are removed/changed

this have "Why" section https://gitlab.com/FascinatedBox/lily/-/blob/d3ace2907747106...

this have "How Lily stands out from other languages:" section https://gitlab.com/FascinatedBox/lily/-/blob/785a88534cced53...


> More importantly, this design makes it easy to compose whole programs that will never be paused by a garbage collection by avoiding cyclical structures.

Or by "breaking" cycles, which will trigger the reference count deallocation.


I have similar stance to you. LLM has been very useful for me but it doesn't really change the fun-ness of programming since my circumstances has allowed me find programming to be very fun. I also want to pivot out to something else if English prompt becomes the main way to develop complex software. Though my other passion is having worse career horizon in the generative AI world (art making). We'll see.


Yes, not too optimistic on the art side when it comes to commercial stuff - if you can generate it cheaply it will be used.

On the hobby side (music) I don't feel the pressure as bad but that's because I don't have any commercial aspirations, it's purely for fun.


How does this compare to Rules engine/rete algorithm? I've been developing a game on top of a rules engine and I can't help but feel very familiar reading the 4 Nova core ideas


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: