[HN Gopher] Simulating Softbody Dynamics in Vlang
___________________________________________________________________
Simulating Softbody Dynamics in Vlang
Author : Tozen
Score : 40 points
Date : 2023-02-20 17:12 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (l-m.dev)
(TXT) w3m dump (l-m.dev)
| dom96 wrote:
| For those that are using and promoting Vlang, what is the thing
| that drew you to the language and what has kept you there?
| frankfrank13 wrote:
| i got into it just because its novel, but I've kept using it
| because I find that the simplicity + performance + safety makes
| it very useful for prototyping. Last year I challenged myself
| to do Advent of Code with V, because I knew I couldn't google
| the answers + there are very few packages for it (I limited
| myself to the standard library). I felt like I was back in CS
| courses, just banging my head against a wall, and it was super
| fun.
|
| I personally can't say why someone would use it over Go or
| Rust, but I can say its a joy to write.
| adenozine wrote:
| I am learning it now, it's pretty neat. I think the simplicity
| is a big appeal for me. I've tried Nim but it just seemed
| inconsistent, the case insensitivity is insane, and I think
| there's a lot of minor but still odd syntax decisions that have
| been made. I'd rather just use python, which is nice, than have
| to finagle my Nim code just for a little speed boost.
|
| Sum types and TCO with -prod is a really nice feature as well.
| Not supporting TCO was a huge bummer when I tried Nim, and many
| other languages tbh.
|
| I already use Go sometimes, so picking up vlang was basically
| free, and I haven't had time to do any big substantial projects
| with it, but I wrote a little irc bot with it and had a good
| afternoon hacking on it.
| codetrotter wrote:
| I don't use it but I always am interested to read about it
| because people used to say that the V in Vlang was for
| Vaporware, but I want to see them keep working on their
| language and succeeding in making the language they want.
| forgotpwd16 wrote:
| V had a rough start but seems to be coming up nicely. The title
| here is old title of post but believe is more appropriate since
| article doesn't really cover how the terminal rendering (which
| imo will be even more interesting) happens but the numerical
| integration.
| galangalalgol wrote:
| I haven't looked in a while, the consensus seemed to be it was
| either a scam or at least a lot of over promise las time I
| looked. Which was disappointing because I really liked the
| description!
|
| Edit: Took another look and I like it. Trying to decide if I
| want to mess with vlang or austral next.
| Tozen wrote:
| > ...the consensus seemed to be it was either a scam...
|
| The V language was always real, and never a scam or
| vaporware. This clearly false view and misconception, partly
| originates from very early on (2019), and whether the
| language would actually be released on GitHub.
|
| When the source code release was delayed (back in 2019),
| detractors and competitors pounced on this, and attempted to
| give the impression that the language didn't exist. But then,
| it was finally released on GitHub, and proven to be real.
| Unfortunately, the very tribal drama had already been
| started, and detractors and competitors kept it going.
| Obviously (since 2019 and easily confirmed on GitHub) V has
| near weekly releases, hundreds of contributors, and
| continually improves. That's about as real as it gets.
|
| Hopefully we can kind of put an end to the old unnecessary
| drama and tribalism. It's now 2023. There is enough space in
| the world for different programming languages to coexist. No
| need to bash other languages or continually fuel more drama,
| we can enjoy whatever language, and keep it moving. Peace.
| tsegratis wrote:
| Looks great mate. Love the animations and exploration you've done
|
| I suppose more complex shapes would benefit from rigid body parts
| aswell
| MobiusHorizons wrote:
| The code snippets in the article bizarrely have text that is of
| several different font sizes. Is this some ide feature? Or is
| this just poorly edited together from screenshots at different
| sizes?
| Tozen wrote:
| I'm not sure what's going on with this comment. The code
| snippets shown on the blog is editable, and is about the same
| size. If the size of the font is a bit different, it should not
| matter, because that isn't the point of what is being
| discussed. Unless you are referring to the animations, but then
| the point is to show the geometric shapes.
|
| Perhaps you want to go to the GitHub page
| (https://github.com/l1mey112/v-2Dsoftbodies). Font sizes would
| all be uniform. But the blog has the animations to first see
| how it works.
| codetrotter wrote:
| Some of the code snippets have lines that vary in font size
| by a very noticeable amount in Safari on iPhone.
|
| https://imgur.io/o44Fkjt
|
| https://imgur.io/OypYkcQ
|
| https://imgur.io/yeK9IwK
|
| It's definitely legitimate to ask what's up with that
| Tozen wrote:
| As mentioned, wasn't sure what was the issue, and had
| responded earlier. Also provided the GitHub link, to be
| helpful. It appears that some people do indeed have an
| issue, depending on their browser.
| jpe90 wrote:
| are you using an ios device by any chance?
|
| author probably needs this:
| https://github.com/adityatelange/hugo-PaperMod/issues/828#is...
|
| i got bit by this on my blog as well
| vosper wrote:
| That's not how it looks for me on Chrome - the sizing is
| consistent. However the entire site is showing as a very rough-
| looking font, like the anti-aliasing is completely messed up. I
| assume we're both seeing font glitches of some kind.
| forgotpwd16 wrote:
| Heh, opened in Chrome and the glitch I've is the line beneath
| the sections is shown above and some part below. On the other
| hand site looks perfect on Firefox.
| agency wrote:
| Same (looks like this: https://imgur.com/a/MVcbb23). It looks
| like they have -webkit-font-smoothing: none; applied globally
| in their stylesheet.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-02-20 23:01 UTC)