5 comments

  • maxall4 51 minutes ago
    I really want to like Julia. It has a nice type system, a good ecosystem, reasonable syntax, and it’s far faster than Python. But there are several issues with its DX that prevent me from using it: the most severe of which being the complete lack of a cache for the JIT (or JIT like system), inducing multi second compile times for scripts that run in <100ms. There are some external packages that try to solve this issue, but they are far from first-party quality, and, in my experience, are quite buggy.

    (I last tried Julia a few years ago; perhaps this has been improved since?)

    • adgjlsfhk1 42 minutes ago
      a between session cache had been merged for 1.14 (release expected within 6-12 months).
    • bandrami 23 minutes ago
      [dead]
  • muragekibicho 38 minutes ago
    Julia uses 1-based indexing. It's competes with R and Matlab for the same set of users. Both R and Julia have their core functions written in C++. Absolutely nothing new.

    From my experience, grad students use Julia when their PI thinks a new programming language will help differentiate their next NSF proposal among vast funding requests.

    • adgjlsfhk1 21 minutes ago
      > Both R and Julia have their core functions written in C++. Absolutely nothing new.

      imo this isn't really a good summary. Julia is one of the 3 languages to have done an exascale HPC run https://arxiv.org/pdf/2309.10292v1 (Fortran and C are the other 2). Some parts of the compiler are written in c++ (the llvm interface), but doing codegen with llvm is much more similar to C/Rust/Fortran than R/Matlab

  • Alien1Being 35 minutes ago
    Thought that it would be about Lisp....
    • manwe150 24 minutes ago
      It was about lisp ;)

      Secret mode: ./julia —-lisp

  • xuchenyi 15 minutes ago
    [flagged]