# 1.0 progress/status

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762>\
**Category:** Internals & Design\
**Created:** [March 16, 2018, 7:56pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762 "2018-03-16T19:56:18Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Iagoba\_Apellaniz](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/iagoba_apellaniz/32/34406_2.png) [@Iagoba\_Apellaniz](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Iagoba_Apellaniz)\
**Post date:** [May 9, 2018, 9:22am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/43 "2018-05-09T09:22:28Z")

</div>

It seems that the only thing missing is the new iteration protocol!! Nice!! In my naive view the rest of issues are straight forward. Isn’t it? Can someone explain for the mortals what is the status of the PR, and why is still not merged? Thanks

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![kristoffer.carlsson](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/kristoffer.carlsson/32/22_2.png) [@kristoffer.carlsson](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/kristoffer.carlsson)\
**Post date:** [May 9, 2018, 9:46am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/44 "2018-05-09T09:46:09Z")

</div>

I think the first post described pretty well what was up with the iteration protocol.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![StefanKarpinski](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/stefankarpinski/32/24_2.png) [@StefanKarpinski](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/StefanKarpinski)\
**Post date:** [May 9, 2018, 11:38am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/45 "2018-05-09T11:38:34Z")

</div>

Perhaps what’s confusing to people is that we are in roughly the same situation as described originally but with [much more progress](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+NewOptimizer+in%3Atitle) having been made. The progress has been somewhat slowed by Keno having various other obligations and lots of travel (he seems to be somewhere new every time I talk to him).

A great deal of [excellent work](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+author%3Ambauman) has been done by Matt as well, including a PR [changing broadcast to use a lazy intermediate representation](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/26891) that is the culmination of a collaborative design/coding process and which surely must have one of the highest fixed-issue-to-changed-lines-of-code ratios in the history of Julia.

The simmering period has also been quite productive otherwise and there’s definitely a sense among us devs that it’s been good to have some time to look for and fix various large and small annoyances in the language. Things are feeling really good now. The biggest outstanding problem is compile times, which Jeff has already started to work on (and doesn’t block an alpha release).

All said, the perception that 0.7-alpha is really, _really_ close is accurate.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![111](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/111/32/33971_2.png) [@111](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/111)\
**Post date:** [May 17, 2018, 1:47pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/46 "2018-05-17T13:47:57Z")

</div>

Is 0.7 near at hand? according to [optimizer](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pulls?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=is%3Apr+NewOptimizer+in%3Atitle) and [merge](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/25261), all the optimizing issues are closed, and we just need “One final go for good measure”.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ExpandingMan](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/expandingman/32/866_2.png) [@ExpandingMan](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/ExpandingMan)\
**Post date:** [May 17, 2018, 2:06pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/47 "2018-05-17T14:06:19Z")

</div>

It might be nice to get some kind of idea on what are the most serious performance regressions to be expected in the release candidate. It looks like there’s still a [good number](https://github.com/JuliaCI/BaseBenchmarkReports/blob/e5506fb7c49ac2fa9ac9cbcdd0dcda38a9b6cae0/1f77d36_vs_d44944d/report.md) of rather significant regressions.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ScottPJones](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/scottpjones/32/146_2.png) [@ScottPJones](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/ScottPJones)\
**Post date:** [May 17, 2018, 2:10pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/48 "2018-05-17T14:10:04Z")

</div>

Has thought been given to moving Regex, BigInt, and BigFloat out of base and into stdlib before v1.0 by the core team? (even if it is just moving the exports out into stdlib, as was done for Unicode, for now)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![111](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/111/32/33971_2.png) [@111](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/111)\
**Post date:** [May 17, 2018, 2:44pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/49 "2018-05-17T14:44:38Z")

</div>

In my understanding, the tests showing 500+ times regression are just test failures when LLVM fails to vectorize. Besides, these might not be too hard to fix.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mbauman](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/mbauman/32/31082_2.png) [@mbauman](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/mbauman)\
**Post date:** [May 17, 2018, 2:55pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/50 "2018-05-17T14:55:32Z")

</div>

That’s not correct. The 200-600x regressions are those that explicitly test start/next/done — those names are being deprecated in favor of the new `iterate` protocol… and deprecation warnings are slow. We’ll have to re-write those benchmarks to test the appropriate new API.

The regressions are ~2x in some of the array indexing code (IIRC that’s a failure to inline/elide boundschecks), and 5-10x in parsing dates and map reduce. All of which will be worked on in the future. Remember, though, the most relevant benchmark results for those coming from 0.6 will be [https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/27030](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/27030) — those still need to be re-run with the new optimizer/iteration.

It’s also expected that compile times might be a bit slower. All of this is stuff we can work on and improve after the tag. If you find a regression, please post an example of it — and even better to add a representative BaseBenchmark!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Iagoba\_Apellaniz](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/iagoba_apellaniz/32/34406_2.png) [@Iagoba\_Apellaniz](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Iagoba_Apellaniz)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2018, 5:49pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/51 "2018-05-21T17:49:40Z")

</div>

New due date! August 6!! Things have changed in [GitHub](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/milestones)

It seems that Julia 1.0 will be released just for JuliaCon. And that 0.7 will come sooner than later. Nice!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ScottPJones](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/scottpjones/32/146_2.png) [@ScottPJones](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/ScottPJones)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2018, 5:55pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/52 "2018-05-21T17:55:00Z")

</div>

Like I’ve been saying all along! 😀

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ExpandingMan](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/expandingman/32/866_2.png) [@ExpandingMan](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/ExpandingMan)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2018, 6:13pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/53 "2018-05-21T18:13:06Z")

</div>

Nice, I for one am very excited. Hopefully the August date will give package developers a little time to fix all the things that `iterate` broke. Note also that Julia also now has \>11\cdot10^3 stars on github! That’s many.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ronis\_BR](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/ronis_br/32/50999_2.png) [@Ronis\_BR](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Ronis_BR)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2018, 6:16pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/54 "2018-05-21T18:16:26Z")

</div>

Time to fix all that warnings with 0.7 for my packages 😄

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ScottPJones](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/scottpjones/32/146_2.png) [@ScottPJones](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/ScottPJones)\
**Post date:** [May 21, 2018, 6:31pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/55 "2018-05-21T18:31:46Z")

</div>

> [@ExpandingMan](#):
>
> Hopefully the August date will give package developers a little time to fix all the things that `iterate` broke.

Hehe, that’s what I’ve been doing lately (I’ve already found a bug in Base caused by the `iterate` change,  
parsing no longer works correctly with `AbstractString`s that don’t have `Char` as their `eltype` (such as all of my strings in `Strs.jl`), see: [Bug with new iteration code in parse](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/bug-with-new-iteration-code-in-parse/11034/2), I have a branch on [my fork of julia](https://github.com/ScottPJones/julia/tree/spj/fixparse) to fix it.)  
Now I’m fixing all the deprecation warnings from the eval change [PR #27098](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/27098) that just went in.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![kli6891](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/kli6891/32/16096_2.png) [@kli6891](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/kli6891)\
**Post date:** [May 24, 2018, 2:54am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/56 "2018-05-24T02:54:17Z")

</div>

[Zero open issues](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/milestone/4) on the 0.7 milestone – guessing a release is imminent. 😃

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![innerlee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b19c9b/32.png) [@innerlee](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/innerlee)\
**Post date:** [May 24, 2018, 3:12am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/57 "2018-05-24T03:12:02Z")

</div>

They are moved to the 1.0 milestone

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jmkuhn](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/jmkuhn/32/2090_2.png) [@jmkuhn](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/jmkuhn)\
**Post date:** [May 24, 2018, 3:12am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/58 "2018-05-24T03:12:19Z")

</div>

There is also [0.7.0-alpha PR](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/27242).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![iwelch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/8c91f0/32.png) [@iwelch](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/iwelch)\
**Post date:** [May 25, 2018, 5:49pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/59 "2018-05-25T17:49:21Z")

</div>

I am trying to understand what I should be using as a non-developer user, though with modest expertise by now.

Is 0.7.0 now recommended over 0.6.2 ? Or should I still stick to 0.6.2? Or wait for 0.7.0-beta (is 0.6.2 terminology-wise a beta)?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![StefanKarpinski](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/stefankarpinski/32/24_2.png) [@StefanKarpinski](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/StefanKarpinski)\
**Post date:** [May 25, 2018, 6:01pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/60 "2018-05-25T18:01:09Z")

</div>

Once an alpha is released we request all package developers to upgrade. Normal users may still want to wait for a while. Once a beta is released you’ll probably want to try it but for an end user it’s perfectly reasonable to wait until an actual final release. It depends on how much you’re willing to be a beta or alpha tester—much like other software with similar labels.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Michael\_Eastwood](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/michael_eastwood/32/669_2.png) [@Michael\_Eastwood](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Michael_Eastwood)\
**Post date:** [May 25, 2018, 9:06pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/61 "2018-05-25T21:06:07Z")

</div>

Is Femtocleaner going to help package authors with deprecations?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Keno](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/keno/32/285_2.png) [@Keno](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Keno)\
**Post date:** [May 25, 2018, 9:22pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762/62 "2018-05-25T21:22:54Z")

</div>

Yes, just need to go get it updated.

[Previous page](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762.md?page=2)

[Next page](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/1-0-progress-status/9762.md?page=4)