HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
willcrichton
lia
Rust2016–2017
willcrichton / lia

lia

A high-level language for Rust

3Distinct people
5Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
342GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

A high-level language for Rust

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by month5 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2016-06-14 08:06:48 UTC to 2017-09-19 16:07:42 UTC.

0122016-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 commentsJun 20162016-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2016-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2016-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsJan 20172017-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-07-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-08-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsSep 2017

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Jun 20162016-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-07-01 00:00:00 UTC110
Jul 20162016-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-08-01 00:00:00 UTC202
Aug 20162016-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-09-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Sep 20162016-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-10-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 20162016-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-11-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 20162016-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-12-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 20162016-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-02-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 20172017-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-03-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 20172017-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-04-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 20172017-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-05-01 00:00:00 UTC000
May 20172017-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-06-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 20172017-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-07-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jul 20172017-07-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-08-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Aug 20172017-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-09-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Sep 20172017-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-10-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

5 sources
This article shows a lot of the silliness in both a) writing compilers in C++ and b) re-creating well-worn compilers tools like parsers from scratch. 1. Their definition of values in the language (unfortunately called "Variables") is a product (class) over all possible types: class Variable { ... double numValue; string strValue; vector<Variable> tuple; string action; string varname; Constants::Type type; }; This means each value at runtime has a large memory footprint, as each instance of a value contains slots for all possible types even though only one will ever be filled. Sum types solve this problem. 2. The author intermixes parsing and code generation. This makes it difficult to implement any kind of optimizations, even for an interpreter. For example, in order to do function inlining in the author's
Read the rest
language, you would have to manually inline calls in every single part of the code generator instead of having IR transformations as separate modules (see: LLVM). It also tightly couples the two pieces of the compiler, making it difficult to change parsing strategies without rewriting the code generator for instance. 3. It took the author nearly 5000 lines of C++ to write an interpreter for a simple Javascript-like scripting language. Some of this is due to the verbosity of C++, and some is due to the needless effort of reimplementing parsing from scratch. I implemented a similar language in <1k lines of Rust [1], and I'm sure that others could do even better in Haskell or OCaml. On top of that, the author's claimed benefit of extensibility requires writing large amounts of boilerplate. [1] https://github.com/willcrichton/lia
In Programming Your Own Language in C++
My first thought is: Neat! Languages with different grammars, syntax, and libraries have different expressivities; my first thought is always compiler implementation in OCaml. I would love, for example, to (effortlessly!) dip into OCaml or Haskell while writing a high-performance C++ program, for example. I am very intrigued by Lia [0] as an example for how languages can be embedded inside of one another for useful effects. See Will Crichton's great blog post for more [1]. However, I am wondering why Python and PHP were chosen. I can't think of a compelling use for having both languages simultaneously. They are both dynamic scripting languages with similar design objectives. [0] https://github.com/willcrichton/lia [1] http://notes.willcrichton.net/the-coming-age-of-the-polyglot...
In Fine-Grained Language Composition: A Case Study

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.