Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Its a suggestion to fix the awkwardness, one that will never get approved You were courageous to even try :-) From their refusal to see any use in explicit variables declarations, their (somewhat related) huge scope debacle, to its strange and irregular 'resolution', not to mention the original absurdly weird propositions they had made to resolve it: the scope and variable declaration subject is pretty hopeless in…
This is just a disagreement over basic design: should variable declarations be explicit or not. It is a choice, and something that reasonable people can disagree on. Framing this as a case of irrational and illogical behaviour is unnecessary and unreasonable in my opinion. A lot of serious thought and debate went into the resolution. There is no need to disrespect and badmouth people because they have different prior…
Julia 1.6 Highlights
191–200 of 224 posts
Re: Julia 1.6 Highlights
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does it mean exactly? Or what is novel here?
The combination. E.g multiple dispatch without JIT would be really slow as you are picking a method to run at runtime based on the type of all the function arguments. That requires a linear search through a list of all possible combinations of input arguments. In a single dispatch language like most object oriented languages, you can do a simple dictionary/hash table lookup. Much faster. With the JIT Julia is able th…
Re: Julia 1.6 Highlights
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is just a disagreement over basic design: should variable declarations be explicit or not. It is a choice, and something that reasonable people can disagree on. Framing this as a case of irrational and illogical behaviour is unnecessary and unreasonable in my opinion. A lot of serious thought and debate went into the resolution. There is no need to disrespect and badmouth people because they have different prior…
Can you tell me one design benefit (a real good one) for not declaring variables before their use, in a mutable by default programming language
Re: Julia 1.6 Highlights
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree, this is a game changer. Previously time to first plot (TTFP) was >1 minute for me, which made julia completely unusable for my day-to-day exploratory data analysis, visualisation, quick random number experiments etc. Now TTFP is less than 10 seconds. I'm now ready (and excited) to jump ship from R and python!
That was also a huge problem for me. I sometimes open Stata/R/Python/Excel, run a few snippets, and I'm done. All four take seconds to start (or even less), and Julia felt like a huge step back in productivity. If it's really fixed, might be good trying again.
_ _ _(_)_ | Documentation: https://docs.julialang.org
(_) | (_) (_) |
_ _ _| |_ __ _ | Type "?" for help, "]?" for Pkg help.
| | | | | | |/ _` | |
| | |_| | | | (_| | | Version 1.6.0 (2021-03-24)
_/ |\__'_|_|_|\__'_| | Official https://julialang.org/ release
|__/ |
(@v1.6) pkg> add Plots
Updating registry at `~/.julia/registries/General`
Updating git-repo `https://github.com/JuliaRegistries/General.git`
Resolving package versions...
Installed Qt_jll ─ v5.15.2+3
Downloaded artifact: Qt
Updating `~/.julia/environments/v1.6/Project.toml`
[91a5bcdd] + Plots v1.11.0
Updating `~/.julia/environments/v1.6/Manifest.toml`
[ede63266] ↑ Qt_jll v5.15.2+2 ⇒ v5.15.2+3
Progress [========================================>] 246/246
246 dependencies successfully precompiled in 140 seconds
julia> @time using Plots
3.689727 seconds (6.58 M allocations: 472.965 MiB, 7.49% gc time, 0.13% compilation time)
julia> @time begin
using Plots
x = 1:10; y = rand(10); # These are the plotting data
plot(x, y)
end
3.050765 seconds (3.63 M allocations: 218.824 MiB, 4.87% gc time, 59.07% compilation time)
julia> @time begin
using Plots
x = 1:10; y = rand(10); # These are the plotting data
plot(x, y)
end
0.001435 seconds (2.61 k allocations: 161.836 KiB)Re: Julia 1.6 Highlights
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
I simply do not understand how some people are able to form so strong opinions in such a short time, and spew out disdain and negativity on the most flimsy basis. It's a matter of temperament, I guess. Julia performance should be on par with Go, if it's slower, read the performance tips in the manual. As for teaching material on 3rd party websites, I don't know what you mean. The Julia manual is available from the ju…
You can verify that the teaching materials are not really up to scratch. Even nim and zig, which have less resources behind them, I think, do a better job there. The manual is a reference manual, and it was difficult to find all the operations on arrays. E.g., the difference between Array{Int} and Array{Int,1} is not clarified from the start. And as I said: I wrote a straight-forward backtracker. It just recursive fu…
The REPL is really great for learning. If you type “Array{Int} == Array{Int, 1}” the result is false. If you type “?Array” it prints the docstring which gives some guidance on how to use one versus the other.
Re: Julia 1.6 Highlights
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I wrote that I was under the impression that the brainfuck interpreter implementations were the only benchmarks in the repo. There are, however (I now realize), also benchmarks for base64 decoding, JSON parsing, and writing your own matmul (rather than calling a BLAS matmul, which is not generally recommended), so this is more reasonable than I thought but still a somewhat odd collection of tasks to benchmark. O…
I'm a daily Julia user but tbh I've gotta agree with parent commenter. I think Jeff's attitude in the "What's bad about Julia" talk is the right way to handle criticism: listen to the person, ask about their use cases, understand how Julia could be improved for that user. Accepting criticism makes a good product, and seeing project leaders do it makes a good impression.
Does the man have to be obsequious everytime he discusses his language in an informal setting?
Re: Julia 1.6 Highlights
#197For example, Julia v1.6 doesn't have a feature to apply `rem` to Gaussian integers, because my pull request could never be completed because I was banned
The language is good, i released several popular Julia projects, but people like Stefan Karpinski are toxic and they are anti-open source because they just ban people from contributing code.
I have zero respect for the Julia community at this point, but the language is alright.
Re: Julia 1.6 Highlights
#198On 1.6, I tried "] add Plots" and julia got stuck.
Please file an issue describing the situation: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/new
Julia v1.6 could have had support for Gaussian integers (was a 10 lines of code in my pull request, which i did because another person requested it).
However, because of assholes like Stefan Karpinski, Julia v1.6 does not have this featute. Julia has a toxic community that is anti-open source.
Re: Julia 1.6 Highlights
#199Re: Julia 1.6 Highlights
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this context, I think there might be an argument to be made that Julia is to multiple dispatch (or multiple dispatch + JAOT) as the iPhone is to “touchscreen computers that can make phone calls”. It’s not that it’s the first, but it seems to be the first where the use of multiple dispatch throughout the community was sufficiently pervasive to kick-start the emergence of the strong network effects we’re now seeing…
Except everyone is forgetting that I also mentioned Dylan, from Apple, and whose goal was to be a system programming language for the Newton OS, with the Dylan team winning over the C++ one, but internal politics made the decision to go with the outcome of the C++ team alongside NewtonScript.
Regarding performance, I don't know much about this in Dylan. Was Dylan able to completely remove the runtime overhead of multiple dispatch for type stable code?