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.
GingerBill and the Odin community put tremendous effort into making sure that the Odin compiler ships with "batteries included". You get base, core and vendor library collection that cover almost everything a developer would need to the point that you can argue that you don't need a package manager for Odin.
I would though. ELM has a very simple, straight forward syntax and everything revolves around the ELM architecture, which makes the whole thing very intuitive. I believe a statically typed and functional language will do just fine without any update for years as long as the initial implementation is done right. Unless there is a need to add some new feature, there is not point in updating the language if all the essentials were well implemented already. ELM compiles to JS and not to a native architecture. It'd be inappropriate to view ELM like one would view languages like C or any that uses LLVM as its backend.
No, its not. They are focused on introducing ELM on the backend as well. ELM isn't backed by big corpos like Rust and Go do so their way of operation will differ by a huge margin than those two langs, especially in terms of marketing so its inaccurate to judge that its dead just due to the inactivity.
its fine if you disagree and think that using "unsafe language" for low level hardware access is wrong but that doesn't change the fact that the more closer one operates to the hardware, the more bare-bone they need the tools to be or else they'll only get in the way of the job. Having to worry about something like a borrow checker or a reference counter just to manipulate a couple of bytes is not an efficient way to perform low level hardware programming.
Also, there is nothing wrong with any "unsafe language". Memory safety is a skill issue, not a language issue. All functional languages are safe and procedural languages are unsafe by nature. Its better to settle on a functional language and compromise on performance if memory safety is of utmost priority. The additional complexity and performance overhead of any supposedly safe procedural language is not worth it for doing low level stuff but it sure could be a fun choice when doing high level stuff.
This was never about the languages primarily though. The C programmers here would react the same way towards any other language, be it Zig or Swift, its not Rust specific. They just don't want to partake the additional headache they'll have to deal with to for making the Linux kernel more accessible to languages other than C.
Despite than, Rust devs kept on pushing it after all that was clearly stated, just to make things more and more annoying. Maintaining a software as huge and widely used as the Linux kernel is a huge responsibility that can't be relied on words like "leave it on our shoulders", especially when real time, immediate response is demanded. Development of something like the Linux kernel in Rust will be left unmaintained eventually, unless millions of dollahs are constantly invested into maintaining it because Rust is not as simple as C and the need to avoid accidental copying, memory leaks and almost all memory related issues will add more work because you can't escape "unsafe" when dealing with low level hadrware and C, making the usage of the Rust programming language for Linux kernel development utterly pointless.
Its not just the dependencies bloatware, there is also an issue of accidentally pulling in a GLP license code base and several others. But if one wishes to make a package manager for Odin, they can do so and other Odin users may use it if they found it to be really helpful but from what I know, Ginger Bill will never officially support it as it doesn't align with his vision of the language.
>Please don’t put words in my mouth. I’m trying to be very clear.
my bad then
>The Odin lsp I found (ols) is not official and not made by gingerBill. Which, again, is fine
Ginger Bill is just the creator of the language. He is already hands full with the front end and back end of the language alone. You pointing out "its fine" makes it seem like you expect him to work on LSP, web site, marketing and everything else all by himself, which he can't and I personally think he won't. LSP is a big mess and it is alright to not prioritize LSP and focus on working on the core language itself, especially if marketing is not a serious concern.
>Odin’s creator has some strong opinions around not prioritizing LSPs and QoL tools around Odin.
no, he does not. He just doesn't use LSP but never did he ever oppose QoL tools.
Odin has great support for LSP and they are working on other tools as well. Do note that Odin doesn't have a foundation like Rust or Zig so their pace of development will be at their own discretion. Please don't expect it to be similar to Zig or other well funded languages.
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.