Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Julia 1.0

julialang.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 446 posts

Re: Julia 1.0

#121

Post by celrod »

ChrisRackauckas wrote: post #105
LittlePeter wrote: post #82

Every release I am downloading Julia and trying to wrestle through some tutorials. Every time (0.4.0, 0.6.0, 1.0.0) I get stuck at some error, usually during the pre-compiling of some dependency. For example, I have downloaded julia-1.0.0. I try to follow this tutorial here, linked in this post by someone: http://juliadb.org/latest/manual/tutorial.html Then I do this and get an error: julia> using JuliaDB [ Info: Pre…

It was literally released today. Of course the packages don't work yet...

Is there anything wrong with recommending 0.7? Most things seem to work by now.

Re: Julia 1.0

#122

Post by mikec3010 »

vectorEQ wrote: post #91

say you have an array of memory items. [][][][][][] this will be marked with some marker (your varible names contain this offset into memory.. logical. thats how computer works.) then in computer, (assembly) you will request an element by saying for example base_offset+(1 elem_len). that would make it logical to use 0 as an offset, because then you can use 'n elem_len' as a generic number to incrememnt the offset by…

> for a computer and how it functions

And what about for a human and how it functions? Are humans here to make computers' lives easier or vice versa?

Humans think from 1...N inclusive and this is the source of a litany of bugs when users first learn a language.

And what you described in asm is just one implementation. In fact, the array documentation says Julia doesn't guarantee tight packing so it doesn't even apply. The next element could be anywhere, and in fact wont be in the case of heterogeneous arrays. Asm is also not straightforward. For instance zeroing a register isn't done with the mov instruction but xor

Re: Julia 1.0

#123

Post by driverdan »

ChrisRackauckas wrote: post #105
LittlePeter wrote: post #82

Every release I am downloading Julia and trying to wrestle through some tutorials. Every time (0.4.0, 0.6.0, 1.0.0) I get stuck at some error, usually during the pre-compiling of some dependency. For example, I have downloaded julia-1.0.0. I try to follow this tutorial here, linked in this post by someone: http://juliadb.org/latest/manual/tutorial.html Then I do this and get an error: julia> using JuliaDB [ Info: Pre…

It was literally released today. Of course the packages don't work yet...

I've never used Julia but why would a language make breaking changes on each release? It doesn't have backwards compatibility? That sounds like a nightmare to work with. Is it because it was pre-1.0?

Re: Julia 1.0

#124

Post by ontouchstart »

KenoFischer wrote: post #100
LittlePeter wrote: post #82

Every release I am downloading Julia and trying to wrestle through some tutorials. Every time (0.4.0, 0.6.0, 1.0.0) I get stuck at some error, usually during the pre-compiling of some dependency. For example, I have downloaded julia-1.0.0. I try to follow this tutorial here, linked in this post by someone: http://juliadb.org/latest/manual/tutorial.html Then I do this and get an error: julia> using JuliaDB [ Info: Pre…

After every release the package ecosystem usually takes a few weeks to catch up. I'd recommend trying 0.6 until then.

Is it possible for the Julia team to make a short tutorial that does not depend on any external packages? Just show the new features in a fresh installation on a clean machine downloaded from https://julialang.org/downloads/ .

That would help a lot of people get started.

Re: Julia 1.0

#125

Post by goatlover »

ur-whale wrote: post #90
stellalo wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1-based indexing is a non-issue

It most certainly is for the vast number of folks who code in C, C++, Java, Python, etc ... It will for sure hurt adoption.

It's not any harder to get used to than using whitespace for blocks in Python, or having to end every damn statement with a semicolon in the C inspired languages.

Re: Julia 1.0

#126

Post by celrod »

LittlePeter wrote: post #112
ChrisRackauckas wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was literally released today. Of course the packages don't work yet...

That makes sense. Maybe I was used to R (CRAN) where uploaded packages are actually tested against the version they declare to support.

On each packages GitHub page, there should be unit test info, including badges that link to Travis and/or Appveyor, indicating where they were treated and whether they passed. If the tests haven't run in a while, they wouldn't have been tested on 1.0. Waiting a month may be a good bet.

Re: Julia 1.0

#127

Post by ChrisRackauckas »

driverdan wrote: post #123
ChrisRackauckas wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was literally released today. Of course the packages don't work yet...

I've never used Julia but why would a language make breaking changes on each release? It doesn't have backwards compatibility? That sounds like a nightmare to work with. Is it because it was pre-1.0?

Yes. v1.0 is literally the release so that all future 1.x releases are backwards compatible. That's why it's such a big deal.

Re: Julia 1.0

#128

Post by ChrisRackauckas »

celrod wrote: post #121
ChrisRackauckas wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was literally released today. Of course the packages don't work yet...

Is there anything wrong with recommending 0.7? Most things seem to work by now.

v0.7 is mostly for developers upgrading packages. It is nice because it throws warnings instead of errors for things that changed. So if it works on v0.7 without depwarns then it will be 1.0 compatible. But in many cases it's not perfect yet, so staying at v0.6 can be nicer than throwing a bunch of depwarns at new users.

Re: Julia 1.0

#129

Post by celrod »

driverdan wrote: post #123
ChrisRackauckas wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was literally released today. Of course the packages don't work yet...

I've never used Julia but why would a language make breaking changes on each release? It doesn't have backwards compatibility? That sounds like a nightmare to work with. Is it because it was pre-1.0?

Exactly, and that is why 1.0 is a big deal: the end of breaking changes until Julia 2.0.

Re: Julia 1.0

#130

Post by pjmlp »

ur-whale wrote: post #90
stellalo wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1-based indexing is a non-issue

It most certainly is for the vast number of folks who code in C, C++, Java, Python, etc ... It will for sure hurt adoption.

Some of those folks started when Fortran, Basic, Clipper, Pascal, Modula-2, Ada were relevant.

1 based indexes were just fine.

Post reply on HN