GoKawiilAssignment behaves like an independent value, while ARC/COW keeps sharing efficient.
Blorp keeps the language surface direct while making effects, failure, and concurrency easier to reason about.
Performance
Blorp compiles to C, so idiomatic Blorp code is intended to run within range of hand-written C. Below is a recent benchmark snapshot from the Blorp benchmark suite, run on an M4 MacBook Air. It's not meant to be authoritative, but shows broadly where blorp is positioned.
Benchmark Blorp C Go Python numeric_loop 0.1242s 0.1215s (1.0x) 0.1726s (1.4x) 5.1754s (41.7x) fib 0.1979s 0.1970s (1.0x) 0.2600s (1.3x) 7.6289s (38.5x) string 0.1169s 0.1071s (0.9x) 0.1681s (1.4x) 0.1323s (1.1x) array_sum 0.0011s 0.0005s (0.5x) 0.0045s (4.1x) 0.0957s (87.0x) array_ops 0.0069s 0.0056s (0.8x) 0.0179s (2.6x) 0.4976s (72.1x) dict_ops 0.1370s - 0.1340s (1.0x) 0.3506s (2.6x) list_ops 0.1236s - 0.2074s (1.7x) 0.4296s (3.5x) set_ops 0.2573s - 0.5509s (2.1x) 0.2332s (0.9x) threaded_cpu_map 0.0150s 0.0110s (0.7x) 0.0191s (1.3x) 0.9889s (65.9x) channel_pipeline 0.0262s 0.0345s (1.3x) 0.0092s (0.4x) 0.1952s (7.5x) sleep_fanout 0.0084s 0.0118s (1.4x) 0.0061s (0.7x) 0.0376s (4.5x) options 0.0148s - - - simd 0.1302s 0.1071s (0.8x) - - nbody 0.0539s 0.0495s (0.9x) 0.0489s (0.9x) 3.0480s (56.5x) binary_trees 0.1217s 0.1125s (0.9x) 0.1158s (1.0x) 0.6813s (5.6x) fannkuch 0.3254s 0.1819s (0.6x) 0.1493s (0.5x) 2.6348s (8.1x) spectral_norm 0.0160s 0.0106s (0.7x) 0.0140s (0.9x) 0.9081s (56.8x) mandelbrot 0.0020s 0.0021s (1.0x) 0.0195s (9.8x) 0.0590s (29.5x) knucleotide 0.0231s - 0.0153s (0.7x) 0.0601s (2.6x) reverse_complement 0.0003s - 0.0001s (0.3x) 0.0022s (7.3x)
Run details: in-process BENCH markers, 52 binaries compiled up front, 4 benchmark threads, Apple clang 21.0.0, Go 1.26.3, Python 3.14.4, and Python concurrency 3.14.4. Comparison cells show time plus the benchmark suite's reported factor relative to Blorp. A dash means that runner was not reported for that benchmark. See performance tools