Given that there are so many failed attempts to optimise arbitrary Python code, it was dubious from the start. Furthermore, the documentation completely ignored these challenges and made it clear that Mojo's goal was to compile to MLIR in order to write kernels for machine learning. The first example of Mojo code was a low level matrix multiplication kernel taking advantage of fancy compilation features and the documentation advertised pointers inspired by Rust's move semantics, neither of which are typically considered friendly or relevant to high level programmers.
From the roadmap:
>Mojo may or may not evolve into a full superset of Python, and it's okay if it doesn't.
But alas they dropped the goal and for me the ball with the decision to stop following this. I will probably not write mojo code when I could use Rust or Julia instead, which are more aligned with my necessities.
https://theconsensus.dev/p/2026/03/12/mojos-not-yet-python.h...
Mojo 1.0 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49261128 - Aug 2026 (244 comments)
The Mojo language (by Modular, now Qualcomm) is now open-source - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49358327 - 108 comments
https://investor.qualcomm.com/news-events/press-releases/new...
Can acqui-death be far away...?
I'm sure Qualcomm would love him to stick around but suspect that they'll maintain mojo even if he leaves.
https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/
(copying from some previous Mojo threads) It's got an ownership system adjacent to Rust, comptime similar to Zig, and a first class dependent type system. Even more exciting, is that uses LLVM (to the best of my understanding) in some novel ways and for more optimizations.
Is it even dependent? More like refinement types, which seems will be in Rust too.Also HN recently mentioned Rust building similar llvm based integration with GPU.
But compared with Python, Julia, Matlab, R, Rust, C, C++ - Mojo feel relief for working with numerics.
WRT the type system, I agree MATLAB is a mess but Julia's multiple dispatch feels more like maths than any other language I've tried.
The way that types interact with methods _feels_ like maths. I.e. you have a method made up of mathematical operators, if you swap out an input, it typically does the natural and correct thing.
Out of those, Julia is the only one that combines Multiple Dispatch and native code, both important for numerics.
Any good resources for getting started? And anything on doing NumPy/SciPy-like stuff in it?
I'd be interested to see where GPU code beats NUMPY's SIMD implementation, which is really
we use numpy + jax for that; works well
They plan Windows support: ” Mojo has supported macOS and Linux for years, and Windows developers have been able to use it through WSL. Native Windows support has always been one of our most common requests from developers.
Millions of developers build on Windows every day, across an enormous range of applications and workloads. We believe Mojo can have a meaningful impact across that ecosystem. Bringing Mojo to Windows the right way requires deep expertise in the platform, which is why we’re delighted that the Microsoft Windows team sees the same opportunity we do — and that we’re working together to make it happen.”
WSL could have been avoided if Microsoft had been more serious about the POSIX subsystem in Windows NT, or later Subsystem for UNIX-based Applications that was available until 2016.
Yes but MS obviously viewed it as important enough to bring it inside their ecosystem.
As for the POSIX subsystem in NT, MacOS is POSIX compliant but Apple provide virtualization APIs to run Linux.
BSDs and all surviving mainframes and micros also have either Linux VM support or syscall compatibility.
Microsoft saw those geeks that were buying Apple as shinny Linux, and then complaining about lack of compatibility, or that they only cared about POSIX toys but not really Linux proper, and saw a business case in shipping Linux in the box to counter that.
Which had they kept and improved POSIX support since Windows NT 3.51, that would never been a matter to discuss about.
For the same reasons I see languages like Python, Java, C# as inferior.
And inferior to what, the crab?
I also, personally, never seen a single project written in either Java or C# that distributes aot binaries.
The limited performance of game engines like the one used by Capcom for Devil May Cry on the Playstation 5?
Java binaries deployed in embedded systems by PTC and Aicas are AOT compiled.
I'm in financial engineering and I feel like mojo is definitely the language for that field in the future, especially with the relatively easy python interop for legacy stuff.
Mojo 1.0
Curious to know what setups they've tested Mojo on so far, as I understood it to be mainly for ML/AI stuff, so commonly pretty beefy workstation, yet I'm getting warnings that it's not recognizing my GPU (RTX Pro 6000). Seems easy enough to work around by editing the gpu_mapping in MODULE.bazel so I guess isn't a huge issue. Just strange to see a really CPU-heavy build, then not recognizing a somewhat common "prosumer" GPU (common in the ecosystem and expected user audience at least).
Mojo's design goals would in theory help this problem long term, but my sm120 PTSD still lingers.
lol, feels like espionage
https://github.com/modular/modular/blob/main/KGEN/docs/Desig...
Compiler walkthrough
https://github.com/modular/modular/blob/main/KGEN/docs/MojoC...
At least according to my small experiment:
For many the closed source nature of the compiler was a knock-out criterion. We will see if Mojo can gain traction now or if it has missed its window of opportunity.
Accepting contributions is not required to be open source.
SQLite doesn’t accept contributions from random people either [0] (though you could argue being public domain isn’t being open source).
Anyway, this is great, I was waiting for this to take the language for a spin! Congrats to the Mojo team!
[0]: https://simonwillison.net/2025/Dec/29/copyright-release/
If the complete source is available and distributable under an OSI-approved license, it is absolutely Open Source. Accepting outside contributions is nowhere in the definition of Open Source.
Just as you can say whatever you want, but facebook/twitter/reddit/whoever is not required to give you a soapbox, you can download this software and make whatever changes you want, but nobody is required to give a shit about your proposed changes.