11–20 of 83 posts
@dang: I'm not sure exactly when this was posted since it seems to have no date, but it's at least (2022) per HN's link from that year: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31396861 I mention this because this is definitely the sort of content that can age poorly. I have no direct experience, I've never so much as touched Julia.
@dang: I'm not sure exactly when this was posted since it seems to have no date, but it's at least (2022) per HN's link from that year: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31396861 I mention this because this is definitely the sort of content that can age poorly. I have no direct experience, I've never so much as touched Julia.
@dang: I'm not sure exactly when this was posted since it seems to have no date, but it's at least (2022) per HN's link from that year: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31396861 I mention this because this is definitely the sort of content that can age poorly. I have no direct experience, I've never so much as touched Julia.
We really don't need all the hall monitoring here, it's lame when you see a submission has comments but then it's meta stuff like complaints about dates and titles.
@dang: I'm not sure exactly when this was posted since it seems to have no date, but it's at least (2022) per HN's link from that year: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31396861 I mention this because this is definitely the sort of content that can age poorly. I have no direct experience, I've never so much as touched Julia.
We really don't need all the hall monitoring here, it's lame when you see a submission has comments but then it's meta stuff like complaints about dates and titles.
I've seen this article several times, and I'm sure Jerf has as well.
Our instinct, with years of being here, is it isn't a good fit for HN, at least at its current age and as labelled.
It is not conducive to healthy discussion to have an aged[1] blanket dismissal of a language coupled to an assertion that saying "the issues looked fixed?" is denial of people's lived experience.
[1] We can infer it was written in 2021, as the newest issue they created is from then, and they avowed never to use the language again.
@dang: I'm not sure exactly when this was posted since it seems to have no date, but it's at least (2022) per HN's link from that year: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31396861 I mention this because this is definitely the sort of content that can age poorly. I have no direct experience, I've never so much as touched Julia.
It cites an example from 2024 so the text has definitely been updated since 2022.
The previous HN thread:
Correctness and composability bugs in the Julia ecosystem - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31396861 - May 2022 (407 comments)
Edit: since there are (again? I seem to remember this last time) complaints about the title being a bit too baity, I've pilfered that previous title for this thread as well
The language is elegant, intuitive and achieves what it promises 99% of the time, but that’s not enough compared to other programming languages.
I'm really surprised by the list of issues as some of those are pretty recent (2024) and pretty important parts of the ecosystem like ordereddict.
Any recommended libraries (or languages) that have thoroughly verified libraries?