Marketing the Odin programming language is weird
105 comments
·October 22, 20240x0203
sshine
> I do find it quite irritating that only place to ask questions [is] discord
It's a tradeoff. The platform is a closed-source silo.
But for a lot of people, it works really well.
I avoided it until eventually one community made me want to be a member.
Those who dislike Discord in that community set up relay bots.
> Community questions and answers need to be readable and searchable without yet another login.
This is a big tragedy that any technical community will suffer from long-term for choosing Discord:
They may cultivate a community, but they will not grow their garden of knowledge.
But to have your resources and attention spread too thin can be devastating, too.
Only huge projects can afford to have multiple Discords, Telegrams, IRCs, Wikis, and not worry too much about the overflow and redundancy.
Small projects like Odin must focus on having a few high-traffic places.
archargelod
> Only huge projects can afford to have multiple Discords, Telegrams, IRCs, Wikis
There's one option available to small projects and actually you already named it yourself:
> relay bots.
Take for example Nim community. It's not huge by any margin, but we have fairly active forum[0], occasionally active Telegram channel and most of activity is on Discord, IRC and Matrix. I've grouped these three because they're almost seamlessly connected with relay bots into one platform. You can join one of several bridged platforms[1] and talk to everyone on Discord, Gitter, Matrix, etc. with quotes, pings and attachments working as you'd expect them to.
It is certainly an extra burden to moderate and manage all of this, but now you can atleast have an IRC archive[2] that's indexable and searchable [3].
On the other hand, having Discord as your *only* place for discussions is plain stupid (read: foolish). Because I know several people, including myself some years ago, that just 'nope out' from using a project when they see that the only place to get support is a Discord channel.
[0] - https://forum.nim-lang.org/
[1] - https://nim-lang.org/community.html
[2] - https://irclogs.nim-lang.org/30-05-2012.html
[3] - https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=site%3Airclogs.nim-lang.org...
sshine
My hat goes off to you.
And yes, I similarly 'nope out' when I see Matrix. The clients are just terrible.
r-w
One word: Discourse.
doublerabbit
And if that's the case, me too. I understand that IRC is plain and boring but discord I avoid.
Shame, I've never seen Odin before and got excited over the show cases. I've been looking to tinker with another language outside of the main three, (python, go, rust) and this looks nice.
I think I may try Lazarus again.
lylejantzi3rd
> I think I may try Lazarus again.
Why Lazarus? You're talking about the Pascal RAD IDE, right?
doublerabbit
Yeah.
throwaway313373
I think that it is hard to market a new "pragmatic" language because the pragmatic decision in most cases is to use an existing language that you already know, that has a community around it with all it's accumulated wisdom (documentation, tutorials, blog posts, StackOverflow Q&A), rich library ecosystem etc.
The main point of "killer feature" is not to make the language more "hypeable" but to give a potential user a clear reason why the benefits of learning your language will outweigh the costs of using a less mature or less popular technology.
wavemode
I think the best approach is to make your language seamlessly interoperable with some existing language.
throwaway313373
I guess it does help by making the cost of adoption lower.
But my main point is that being an early adopter of a non-mainstream tech is fundamentally unpragmatic and usually people are driven to try something new by desire to try something __cool__ not by pragmatic considerations.
IshKebab
Well that usually has significant downsides too so it's not as simple as "do that". But yeah if you can do that it's a big benefit.
ksp-atlas
That is one thing that could be a killer feature and I like Zig for it, but I can see myself using a language without that level of interoperability if it has a good enough killer feature set
baranul
One of the best ways for a developer to plead their case for using their language, is to have a book written about it. That's where to teach people how to use the language, show in code the advantages of using it, and elaborate in detail why its a better language.
If the language doesn't at least have a book written on it, then it can be argued it's way too early to take the language seriously. Some of the reasons why the language has not reached the stage to be written about: still too unstable, few followers, or still making a lot of breaking changes. Other reasons, like laziness or arrogance, are equally not good.
Some of these new hyped languages like Odin, C3, hare, beef, pony, etc... They get a lot of continuous attention on here and specific other places, but then when we go to find out more about them, there is little of real substance. Their GitHub has few stars, few contributors, no Wikipedia page, not a thing about them on Amazon, etc...
At least start with step 1. Where is the book on this programming language? Would be nice to be able to actually read or see more than just a blog entry or an ad.
rwbt
I recently used Odin in a commercial project and had a great experience. For me the biggest hurdle was not the language, but having to write programs without an IDE like Visual Studio/Xcode. Having to write my own build scripts (shell or batch files) etc and maintaining them is a PITA.
But I'm glad I did it because it checks off all the "C but nicer" checkboxes.
dkersten
The fact that it not only doesn’t have a built in build tool/package manager, but that the author has also said he doesn’t believe in them and will never make one was very off putting to me. I love how languages like Rust have cargo, or gleam has it built right into the compiler. I’m so fed up with how in C++ or Python there’s a billion competing tools. The language looked really cool, but without good author-blessed tooling, I doubt I’ll ever use it myself.
ossobuco
> The fact that it not only doesn’t have a built in build tool/package manager...
I've been programming in Odin for a few months now, and I've come to actually like this choice.
I still use the occasional dependency, and installing it is even easier than with a package manager!
I download a repo as zip from github, extract it in my project, and voilà, it's ready to use. No compilation, transpilation, peer dependencies, locking versions, etc.
Another positive of this approach is that I can now easily read the dependency source code and if needed modify it, as it's become a part of my project, not some transpiled and minified version of that code sitting in an unversioned folder.
Overall, in Odin I use dependencies much more sparingly than when I work with JS. The reason is that the core and vendor packages of the language already include a surprising amount of things you'd normally reach npm/cargo for. Need linear algebra primitives? Specialized data structures like a priority queue? SDL2? stbi? It's all included in the language (and so much more), ready to use.
I've come to realize that more often than not it's fine to reinvent the wheel to solve your specific problem rather than relying on a generalized (and thus unoptimized) 3rd party library.
dkersten
Thanks for taking the time to tell us about your experience! I’m happy it works well for you! With that said, that doesn’t sound like it’s for me.
This sounds like what I already do in C++ (except I use git submodules for dependencies because it makes it easier to pull new versions, check for versions, etc), and tbh I don’t much like it. I do it out of necessity. I’d much rather keep tabs of all my libraries and versions on a project file and have a tool that will download the version for me, build it, tell me when new versions are available, update to the latest version (if I so choose), and so on. In C++, I have to manually do to each dependency and check if there’s a new version, and pull it if I decide I want it. In, eg, Gleam, I can ask gleam what’s new.
In Odin, it sounds like I have to do the same — either use submodules or download the release files by hand. I have to manually check for updates and then replace my local files.
It’s just not something I personally like to do. The author is entitled to be opinionated about this, but it clashes with my own opinion, so that means I probably won’t try the language even though it looks pretty good from a language design point of view.
foresto
These dependency managers are something of a double-edged sword. They avoid a lot of work if your project has a lot of external packages, but they also encourage pulling in lots of external dependencies without much thought. Every one of those, and every one of their sub-dependencies, exposes users of the software to significantly more risk. It's a breeding ground for common vulnerabilities and supply chain attacks.
Partly because of this, I try to avoid external dependencies as much as possible. When I need something that's not built in to the language, I choose in the following order of preference:
1. The standard library and target platform libraries, augmenting any inadequate features with my own extensions if necessary.
2. A very well known, well maintained, and widely used library with few dependencies of its own. Something that could almost be mistaken for #1.
3. Write my own minimal version of what I need, if I can do so with a reasonable level of effort.
4. A lesser-known third-party library, if it appears well maintained, and if I am willing to audit it and every future update to it.
A happy side effect is that a language with no built-in dependency manager is still perfectly viable for me, since it wouldn't be saving me much work anyway.
dkersten
Well… we can’t save people from themselves. It’s always prudent to ensure the libraries you use are high quality, stable, and well maintained and your list is a good order of reference to live by, in any language.
AtlasBarfed
A modern language is a runtime library and ecosystem (a BIG one) ide tooling analysis, deployment, etc.
You can't be a general language without general tooling.
FooBarBizBazz
The SoA features look really nice. I have wanted that forever.
Matrices are built in(!), and look nicely implemented. So are complex numbers and quaternions!
The array programming aspects in general look great.
Zig might be the nicer language for a kernel or a server of some kind, but Odin looks like the better language not just for games, but also for robotics and for scientific programming.
The only problem I forsee is that it seems hard to write nice mathematical libraries for anything that isn't built in.
For example, suppose I want to work with polynomials using a natural infix syntax. Or that I want to wrap matrices/quaternions in types representing various mathematical groups. Or that I want to implement geometric algebra with wedge products and such. Or that I want to form matrices of elements from some finite field. Those sorts of things might push a person back to C++ (or maybe Nim can do it).
I love the SoA/array/matrix stuff though, and the "standard package" selections look great.
brabel
The best marketing for me is to see lots of useful/large projects using the language. That's why I invest time in Rust: lots of things are built on Rust, as the constant flow of "ABC written in Rust" posts on HN and other forums can attest to. Because that means that people who are good enough to write those things thought that Rust was a good choice.
Go is the same thing: I learned it because in devops it's the dominant language, which tells me it must be pretty good for those use cases (even if so many people dislike it, no one can claim it's not good enough).
I've looked into Odin and thought it was interesting, but given the amount of work being put into Zig, right now I feel like that's the safest choice (I must say I dislike how even basic things are still being changed in Zig, but no one said it would be otherwise so that's on me). Zig gives very tangible benefits, like not depending on just the LLVM (WIP) as a compiler backend, being able to compile to basically any combination of C stdlib/arch/OS from anywhere without worrying about toolchains and other things that I believe Odin lags behind, despite perhaps being the better language of the two when looking solely at its design (I am not too sure about that as I haven't used Odin for anything yet, and done very little Zig).
bobajeff
Odin's issue isn't hypeabilty but Googleability. I think for while I had to type odin-lang to find resources on it instead of The Odin Project.
I actually really enjoyed the language back when I'd used it. One issue I think every language leaves out there is that the language is just a tool and increasingly only one part of a larger tool the IDE/SDK/Engine/Platform. I don't want to really learn a language so much as make useful programs.
Right now we all pay attention when someone announces their new language that's supposed to do things better than existing ones out there but there is a limit to what problems a new language can address.
If you want to make a game for the Switch/PlayStation/Xbox you'll need an SDK and likely can't even use anything but c or c++. If you don't want to make your own engine you'll use whatever languages the engine uses to get things done in. If you want to make a cross platform app that handles accessibility and internationalization you're going to be making a web or electron app.
As much as I am interested in APL, Lisp and smalltalk right now, I get stuck when I ask 'What project am I interested in using this in?'
baranul
Arguably the reason why Odin has no or less Googleability, is it has no Wikipedia page, no books on Amazon, and few third party code examples at known places for programming enthusiasts. For any language to be taken seriously, their developers or fans should at least spend more time on that than hype.
The main thing it seems to have, is the hype and the cult of personality around its creator, ginger bill and lots of interviews and close ups of red hair. The problem with that, it becomes more about him and the bragging about his achievements.
> I don't want to really learn a language so much as make useful programs.
That's why instead of the language creator bragging about themselves, many users want to be taught or see examples of what the language can actually do for them. That starts with books, code examples, more demo projects, etc...
SleepyMyroslav
As someone who's working in gamedev but never ever considered Odin I think that Odin might get more attention if there will be a well known project that is a)open b)good fit for Odin c) not too simplistic. I do not think a game project can be that open but something smaller might do. A project like this would make it clear how language tools work, all integrations and interoperability with languages and libraries look like and such. Even basic questions on build systems and text editor autocomplete setups may throw off hobby devs. Without a hobby project I feel a pro will not have enough information to evaluate language in production environment.
lylejantzi3rd
Would a 3d animation software like EmberGen[0] qualify? Because they already have it[1]. I think it's going to take something bigger, like a massively popular indie or AAA game that programmed their game in odin using an open source engine. Quite the needle to thread.
jay_kyburz
Yeah, we need to see how all the pieces fit together. The renderer, physics, UI, sound, input handling, asset loading and memory management.
murlin
Rather sure that the only way to market most anything is to make it very visible and quickly understandable (or have the appearance of). It's unclear to me what Ginger Bill expects from the language, a less used and well loved tool is good too (tee hee). Amongst whom should it be popular? How do you make as many of them as possible understand what problems it solves?
Money's a different question hey - there's more funding in open source than there used to be and you can really just ask for money and fill out paperwork and get grants and such if it's a useful project, otherwise it will need to embed into some kinds of important projects so that companies need to invest in it. Can Odin do that?
Asking the internet how to market a niche thing that they've never built is questionable at the outset though :v) Do wish the best for Odin though, it's kino.
frou_dh
Get some of those annoying YouTuber “dev influencers” to cover it and that will get all the developer teenagers hyped about it. It almost goes without saying that the YouTuber should also be gurning in the thumbnail.
hluska
Why brand a language via “annoying” influencers? The pro is obviously visibility, but doesn’t that switch the problem from visibility into reputation management?
diggan
Great way to get freshly made developers to use something, but for the rest of us? Probably has the opposite effect if any.
lylejantzi3rd
Did you even do a search in youtube for "odin language"? Lots of dev influencers have covered odin, including an hour long interview the Primeagen did with GingerBill about odin.
foo42
There's a good episode of the "Developer voices" podcast with Ginger Bill about Odin.
(There are many other good episodes too - it's one of the best developer podcasts about imo)
akkad33
Is ginger bill his real name
Rusky
> those “killer features” are usually absolute nonsense, very niche, or they rarely have any big benefit
This is a fantastic way to turn everyone off of your language: dismiss everything they like about the ones they're already using!
IshKebab
Right? So I'm apparently an idiot for thinking Rust's borrow checker, or Go's blissful deployment experience, or Zig's clever comptime system are good... Ok I guess I'm not going to like Odin then.
ofrzeta
Very often these days I read about memory management as a differentiating factor. On one hand there's Rust with more "manual" memory management (I think) opposed to Go with its indeterministic GC pauses (see Discord blog posts about why they prefer Rust to Go because of that). On the other hand there's Go with its very simple automatic memory management. Where does Odin fit in?
I see that there are two paragraphs on memory management (https://odin-lang.org/docs/overview/#allocators) in the overview but they dive into the details very soon and don't really paint the big picture (I think the sentence "This means that Odin programmers must manage their own memory, allocations, and tracking" is not a great selling point, all other things being equal).
I thought the funding section was a little odd; I was under the impression that Bill was being paid by JangaFX to develop/maintain the language? But I think the corporate sponsorship of language development should be the norm. If existing languages are not sufficient to solve a business need, then they should pay for the development of a new one (or directly support one they rely on). But making a language "popular" and widely used is directly opposed to making it paid. There are plenty of closed languages out there, but they're only used by the corporations that developed them, and are probably kept closed to make sure the language doesn't stray from their business needs, and/or to maintain a competitive advantage.
Otherwise, I'm generally a fan of Odin, but I do find it quite irritating that only place to ask questions and participate in the "community" is locked behind discord. I even gritted my teeth and tried to make an account for discord just for this, but discord wouldn't accept my (apparently mandatory) phone number. Community questions and answers need to be readable and searchable without yet another login. If I'm learning a language and can't find an answer to a question that was almost certainly asked already, that's just another stumbling block that will prevent me from using said language.