Mojo can actually create fully standalone binaries, so you don't even need a Mojo install to run them! Also the binaries are really small compared to languages that need a big runtime (e.g. a binary containing the matmul implementation is ~100kb).
I'm not sure how long it will take before there's enough ML/DL functionality to write something like fastai in Mojo. I think there will be at least one more major version of fastai in Python. And even when Mojo can support what fastai needs, I expect to continue to supporting fastai on python as well.
So, should the absence of an answer to the question of a standalone compiler be interpreted as that this will not happen?
Reason for asking: Without a stand-alone, open source compiler chain, Mojo will be out of question for one of the most exciting application areas I can think of: Computational biology.
How does that work given that the binary needs to lug around a CPython binary (unless you want to depend on the OS python)? Also, how does this deal with python libraries?
but won't that include most applications for the foreseeable future? I assume no one is going to be rewriting the entire data processing/web stack from python to mojo in the near future, right?
I'm not sure how long it will take before there's enough ML/DL functionality to write something like fastai in Mojo. I think there will be at least one more major version of fastai in Python. And even when Mojo can support what fastai needs, I expect to continue to supporting fastai on python as well.