Hi Sirfurboy, I think we are not too far away from a compromise statement. However, do believe it is better for us to use neutral and impartial language in both the article and edit summaries. In regards to the article, the differences appear to be: (1) What options are "presently supported" versus what "will be supported". (2) Wording around autofree.
The 4 options are presently supported by the previous and present releases of V. If I used experimental, would we be in agreement? Or remove the statement entirely, other than showing name and the command line flag? As it's unknown when you will respond, will go ahead put experimental in (since I'm present). Wukuendo (talk) 17:09, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
- This should be on the article talk page so that others may contribute. I'll move it there. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:16, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
- Added "experimental", for the opposing side, on top of rewording to maintain the focus on what options are available by command line. Wukuendo (talk) 17:31, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
- There is almost nothing so important that an update absolutely has to be made now, especially when that edit removes, for the second time, a reference. We are in agreement that presentation should be neutral and impartial. Where we disagree is over what the neutral presentation is. V is an incomplete programming language that has some interesting concepts. Nevertheless I see no evidence that autofree, which is potentially very interesting, exists in anything more than an alpha kludge. We lack good secondary sources for this language, because it is niche and novel. No one has looked at autofree in detail and explained how it would overcome significant technical challenges. We do have a source (based on primary source statements from the creator) that suggests the code for autofree actually falls back on system calls, and that it causes massive memory leaks. We also know from the developer that it can and does crash systems (presumably because it gobbles up all the memory). But I am not trying to add any of that to the article, because it is not possible to do so based on secondary sources. What we do have to recognise, however, is that even the developer documentation makes it clear that autofree is not something the language offers now. It is a work in progress. We should not say the language offers autofree, because there is no sense in which it does. What it offers now is something that attempts autofree but mostly just leaks memory. It is the intention that it will offer autofree, although there is no guarantee. It is entirely possible that the developer will issue a version 1.0 release of the language that does not have this feature, because it is not clear at all how this can be made to work. So we can't say it is in the language, only that it is intended it will be. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 17:38, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
- We are not suppose to turn the talk page into a drama forum (WP:NOTFORUM) to engage in epic battles or to disparage.
- The section shows the 4 available options, supported by secondary references, where authors reviewed the language.
- It is clearly stated that V is in beta. That is the correct terminology. Not "incomplete", "kludge", or any kind of partisan remark.
- Making absolutist statements is inappropriate. It is not all or nothing. Always works or never works. There is middle ground.
- The goals and purpose of the V language is not autofree. It is one of the available options that can be turned on.
- Autofree is presently offered, can be used, and turned on from the command line. Usage and result depends on situation, thus documentation presently warns against using, because still in development. Until production ready, recommends to use the GC.
- The documentation and sources are not making hyperbolic statements like "gobbles up all memory" and "crashes systems". Instead, the documentation shows how the programmer can work with the autofree engine on custom data types, to possibly get better results.
- The point of the compromise is not to endorse or condemn. We are suppose to be impartial. Therefore, simply showing it is one of the options available, with a brief description of it. Wukuendo (talk) 20:17, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
.svg){kind=logo}
