> Hare as a project seems to have a very sober, laser focus. I initially didn't get it, but this article made it click.
But I don't "get it." Why would I choose Hare over plain old C? What are the motivating features of the language that make it "worth it?"
Remember: It's a pretty big hurdle to write something in a lesser-known language. If I had to convince a team of developers to choose Hare over C/C++/Rust, what would be the argument in Hare's favor?
This [0] article was shared last week about "why" hare. IMO, there are some reasonable improvements to some of the roughest parts of C - lack of namespacing, abundant use of sizeof, bounds checking (with an escape hatch), forced initializiation, "non-nullable" pointers (i.e. references in C++), however all of those don't really matter in the grand scheme of things because hare won't ever run on mac or windows[1].
No, it's a philosophical decision from the project. QBE works on Mac, for example. The link I shared states that it runs on non-x64 platforms, but only on free OS's
It is too early for most, if not all, projects to consider working in Hare over C/C++/Rust. It is a young, incomplete language, still pre-1.0. It may be interesting to those who are open to a more experimental language to work with during its early stages. As it matures, the utility will ideally grow with time.
