I'm not sure I like how V seems to claim to be better across so many dimensions. Language development is all about tradeoffs. You can have good static analysis or fast compilation, not both. If you look at most successful languages, they don't claim to be a silver bullet. Rust doesn't claim that it compiles quickly. Go doesn't claim to have the best type system. Python isn't the fastest language.
I'm curious to see how V ends up. It's unlikely that it'll succeed at everything, so eventually it'll choose a niche. And backtrack/sweep under the rug the claims that don't fit in said niche.
V is not a silver bullet either. No language is.
V values highly fast compilation times, and does not claim to have the best type system, similar to Go.
- As fast as C
- No manual memory management
- No GC
- Memory safety
- Not hard like Rust
You have fundamentally conflicting requirements. Saying "we'll do it like lobster" does not solve that. Lobster is essentially region based memory management with fallbacks to reference counting at runtime. That fundamentally contradicts "as fast as C". You cannot do more work than C at runtime and still be faster.
Lobster is also a different language which had to forgo a number of features V has already embraced. It's unclear how that can be rectified.
I'm curious to see how V ends up. It's unlikely that it'll succeed at everything, so eventually it'll choose a niche. And backtrack/sweep under the rug the claims that don't fit in said niche.