About static compilation and static analysis

[Palli]

Julia doesn’t need 2.0 to compile to binaries, since it’s already possible.

As you may know PackageCompiler.jl makes it possible (and while I’ve not used it recently, I understand it’s much improved in recent years, or was it only since Nov 2.0 version, since I used it).

You may want to look into non-default options with that packages, and new non-default options in Julia 1.8:

• New option --strip-metadata to remove docstrings, source location information, and local variable names when building a system image (#42513).
• New option --strip-ir to remove the compiler’s IR (intermediate representation) of source code when building a system image. The resulting image will only work if --compile=all is used, or if all needed code is precompiled (#42925).

Is the Julia Language Worth Learning? (Pros and Cons)

Poor support for static compilation

That should have all features, e.g. threading and GC, and Windows ok. But you can also look at, without that:

[ANN] StaticTools.jl: Enabling StaticCompiler.jl-based compilation of Julia code to standalone native binaries by avoiding GC allocations and `llvmcall`-ing all the things

Technically this one has been registered for a couple months already, but we never made an announcement, so here goes! GitHub - brenhinkeller/StaticTools.jl: Enabling StaticCompiler.jl-based compilation of (some) Julia code to standalone native binaries by avoiding GC allocations and llvmcall-ing all the things! I’ve just released version 0.3, which brings a lot of major changes. While it’s still a somewhat experimental package, I think it’s at least to some extent ready for other folks to use,…

Tools to enable StaticCompiler.jl-based static compilation of Julia code (or more accurately, a subset of Julia which we might call “unsafe Julia”) to standalone native binaries by avoiding GC allocations and llvmcall-ing all the things!