# Congrats for Julia 1.13!

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343>\
**Category:** Community\
**Created:** [September 10, 2026, 4:19pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343 "2026-09-10T16:19:27Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ufechner7](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/ufechner7/32/51363_2.png) [@ufechner7](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/ufechner7)\
**Post date:** [September 10, 2026, 4:19pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/1 "2026-09-10T16:19:27Z")

</div>

I am very happy that Julia 1.13 has finally been released!

30% shorter precompilation time: I can confirm that (Linux user).  
And running the tests no longer triggers recompilation of my 500+ packages. Very happy!

Better code completion in the REPL: In particular, if I type:

```julia-auto
include("examples/Tether_11<TAB>

```

the trailing `.jl")` gets appended.

I have the impression that compiling a system image needs more RAM, but I still need to confirm that.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![obsidianjulua](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/obsidianjulua/32/221495_2.png) [@obsidianjulua](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/obsidianjulua)\
**Post date:** [September 10, 2026, 4:58pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/2 "2026-09-10T16:58:28Z")

</div>

I love this, I just found nightly 1.14 is shipping with llvm 22 and mlir. Thats basically everything Ive ever asked for right there. Then I found Binutils\_jll too recently. Been very exciting.

The jump from internal llvm 18 to 22 is just amazing to me, i kept watch the mg/llvm commits for a long time

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![greatpet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@greatpet](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/greatpet)\
**Post date:** [September 10, 2026, 9:31pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/3 "2026-09-10T21:31:47Z")

</div>

The REPL experience is very nice. On the other hand, I’m temporarily blocked from upgrading, since VSCode language server crashes on my computer with Julia 1.13; I can see that other users already filed github issues with LanguageServer related to Julia 1.13 today.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![obsidianjulua](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/obsidianjulua/32/221495_2.png) [@obsidianjulua](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/obsidianjulua)\
**Post date:** [September 10, 2026, 10:15pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/4 "2026-09-10T22:15:36Z")

</div>

Im sorry to hear that, Im sure they will fix everything soon, I actually been at work and haven’t touched 1.13 and have been excited to update, I get beat up everytime I update Arch so Julia stability is uneventful for me in most cases. I really use the code completion to navigate and do alot in the REPL. It looks amazing from what Ive read on the discourse so far besides OhMyRepl issues and certain packages blocking the update. Is the new code completion supposed to replace OhMyREPL?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![adienes](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/adienes/32/37459_2.png) [@adienes](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/adienes)\
**Post date:** [September 10, 2026, 11:11pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/5 "2026-09-10T23:11:14Z")

</div>

> [@obsidianjulua](#):
>
> just found nightly 1.14 is shipping with llvm 22

it will probably be on LLVM 23 by the time of the release

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![obsidianjulua](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/obsidianjulua/32/221495_2.png) [@obsidianjulua](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/obsidianjulua)\
**Post date:** [September 10, 2026, 11:52pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/6 "2026-09-10T23:52:54Z")

</div>

Thats alright, I learned a very valuable lesson about version stability lately and Im never drifting away from Julias internal versioning. Even if mlir goes to 23 im staying home… I do really like the ClangIR integration with with mlir they are working on though, that will be in 23 for sure.

edit: I was wrong ClangIR(CIR) is in the main llvm-project already as of Feb 21, 2026

R.I.P OhMyREPL

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Olivier\_Merchiers](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/olivier_merchiers/32/4073_2.png) [@Olivier\_Merchiers](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Olivier_Merchiers)\
**Post date:** [September 11, 2026, 8:15am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/7 "2026-09-11T08:15:11Z")

</div>

I fully agree 1.13 is a great release! Very snappy, big quality of life improvement!  
Thanks to all the contributors!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![fabiangans](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/fabiangans/32/2624_2.png) [@fabiangans](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/fabiangans)\
**Post date:** [September 11, 2026, 8:25am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/8 "2026-09-11T08:25:57Z")

</div>

> [@greatpet](#):
>
> The REPL experience is very nice. On the other hand, I’m temporarily blocked from upgrading, since VSCode language server crashes on my computer with Julia 1.13; I can see that other users already filed github issues with LanguageServer related to Julia 1.13 today.

I was running into the same issue after upgrading. One temporary workaround is to set the Languageserver juliaup channel in the vscode extension settings to `1.12`. Then the languageserver process still runs 1.12 while your actual VSCode REPL runs 1.13.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![braamvandyk](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/braamvandyk/32/5086_2.png) [@braamvandyk](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/braamvandyk)\
**Post date:** [September 11, 2026, 1:34pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/9 "2026-09-11T13:34:06Z")

</div>

Changing to the pre-release version of the Julia add-in fixed that for me.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mihalybaci](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/mihalybaci/32/13528_2.png) [@mihalybaci](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/mihalybaci)\
**Post date:** [September 11, 2026, 2:10pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/10 "2026-09-11T14:10:01Z")

</div>

> [@obsidianjulua](#):
>
> R.I.P OhMyREPL

OhMyREPL.jl is still going and still useful for themes! [How to enable REPL Syntax Highlighting in 1.13?](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/how-to-enable-repl-syntax-highlighting-in-1-13/139340/)

“I’m not dead! … I’m getting better” - Monty Python and the Holy Grail

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pfitzseb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/pfitzseb/32/45566_2.png) [@pfitzseb](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/pfitzseb)\
**Post date:** [September 11, 2026, 5:41pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/11 "2026-09-11T17:41:55Z")

</div>

The release version now works too. We had a lot of trouble cutting new releases due to some marketplace hiccups.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Nathan\_Boyer](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/nathan_boyer/32/14825_2.png) [@Nathan\_Boyer](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Nathan_Boyer)\
**Post date:** [September 11, 2026, 8:35pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/12 "2026-09-11T20:35:14Z")

</div>

Is there an easy way to switch back to the release version of the VSCode extension after switching to the pre-release version? The prominent button that got me here is gone.

 ![image](https://global.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/original/3X/2/8/28d16c4d77495ad2f3eec8567544f4fee49bd57d.png)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pfitzseb](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/pfitzseb/32/45566_2.png) [@pfitzseb](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/pfitzseb)\
**Post date:** [September 11, 2026, 9:10pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/13 "2026-09-11T21:10:23Z")

</div>

You should automatically get switched back to the release channel if there are newer releases there (which is the case now).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ianshmean](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/ianshmean/32/216042_2.png) [@ianshmean](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/ianshmean)\
**Post date:** [September 11, 2026, 9:49pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/14 "2026-09-11T21:49:41Z")

</div>

@ufechner7 I’m happy to hear that real world experience matches our TTFX measurements, that was the goal of the new tracking 🎉

And none of that was possible without all the submissions people made to [GitHub - tecosaur/Julia-TTFX-Snippets: A collection of TTFX workloads for Julia packages, for longitudinal performance testing. · GitHub](https://github.com/tecosaur/Julia-TTFX-Snippets) so thanks to everyone there.

Also, we’ve gotten better at testing for low latency things, like no JIT during standard julia startup, so julia should remain as fast or get faster from here, that’s the idea at least.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Sole](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/sole/32/202974_2.png) [@Sole](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Sole)\
**Post date:** [September 13, 2026, 3:26am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/15 "2026-09-13T03:26:59Z")

</div>

it would be awsome if there is a basic benchmark for every new release.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![greatpet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e495f1/32.png) [@greatpet](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/greatpet)\
**Post date:** [September 13, 2026, 8:56am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/16 "2026-09-13T08:56:35Z")

</div>

There’s a micro-benchmark for Julia 1.0.0:

> **[Julia Micro-Benchmarks](https://julialang.org/benchmarks/)**
>
> Official website for the Julia programming language

People have discussed keeping it up to date:

> <https://github.com/JuliaLang/Microbenchmarks/issues/48>
>
> Since we have made Julia 1.6 the new LTS version, it might make sense to update …the benchmark results in https://julialang.org/benchmarks/.

But it’s apparently not easy due to the large number of languages, including proprietary ones.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![MDSW](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/94ad74/32.png) [@MDSW](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/MDSW)\
**Post date:** [September 14, 2026, 12:27pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/17 "2026-09-14T12:27:27Z")

</div>

The release notes link for 1.13 made the front page of yesterday, and remains there as of today.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mason](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/mason/32/2423_2.png) [@Mason](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Mason)\
**Post date:** [September 14, 2026, 1:03pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/18 "2026-09-14T13:03:34Z")

</div>

For people reading this, **please do not follow the link that @MDSW posted**.

Hacker News has brigading protections, and linking to a hacker news post from an outside source that makes a bunch of people click the link and then upvote, can cause the post to be downranked.

If you want to see the discussion, just go to [https://news.ycombinator.com](https://news.ycombinator.com) and click on the post titled “Julia 1.13 Highlights”.

Hopefully MSDW can edit their post to remove the link.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Palli](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/palli/32/3380_2.png) [@Palli](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Palli)\
**Post date:** [September 14, 2026, 2:37pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/19 "2026-09-14T14:37:42Z")

</div>

> [@ufechner7](#):
>
> 30% shorter precompilation time

I still say congrats on that and more, but Julia 1.13 is not faster at everything (what follows mainly important for showing good benchmark numbers). ~~I think I know why, likely mostly this overhead~~ [see answer below]:

#= 298.8 ms =# precompile(Tuple{typeof(Main.main), Int64})

[it seems to be slower on 1.13, but hard to just try to eyeball it.]

and sometimes it goes up to:  
#= 351.6 ms =# precompile(Tuple{typeof(Main.main), Int64})

and what is this new (shown in different color):  
#= 17.3 ms =# precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.should\_use\_main\_entrypoint)}) # recompile

Background, I’m timing (can anyone confirm, it’s not just on my machine):

> **[spectral-norm Julia #4 program (Benchmarks Game)](https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.debian.net/benchmarksgame/program/spectralnorm-julia-4.html)**

```julia-auto
$ hyperfine 'julia +1.13 -tauto --cpu-target=ivybridge --math-mode=ieee -- spectralnorm.julia-4.julia 5500'
Benchmark 1: julia +1.13 -tauto --cpu-target=ivybridge --math-mode=ieee -- spectralnorm.julia-4.julia 5500
  Time (mean ± σ): 1.538 s ± 0.030 s [User: 6.750 s, System: 0.160 s]
  Range (min … max): 1.477 s … 1.576 s 10 runs

$ hyperfine 'julia +1.11.1 -tauto --cpu-target=ivybridge --math-mode=ieee -- spectralnorm.julia-4.julia 5500'
Benchmark 1: julia +1.11.1 -tauto --cpu-target=ivybridge --math-mode=ieee -- spectralnorm.julia-4.julia 5500
  Time (mean ± σ): 1.210 s ± 0.059 s [User: 7.902 s, System: 0.113 s]
  Range (min … max): 1.086 s … 1.272 s 10 runs

It's not about any extra flags such as -tauto.

Adding -O3 actually made is just slower possibly unlike for +1.11.1 that got tiny bit faster (or benchmark noise):
$ hyperfine 'julia +1.13 -O3 -- spectralnorm.julia-4.julia 5500'
Benchmark 1: julia +1.13 -O3 -- spectralnorm.julia-4.julia 5500
  Time (mean ± σ): 3.572 s ± 0.064 s [User: 4.329 s, System: 0.127 s]
  Range (min … max): 3.492 s … 3.699 s 10 runs

$ time julia +1.13 --trace-compile=stderr --trace-compile-timing --gc-sweep-always-full -- spectralnorm.julia-4.julia 55
#= 8.3 ms =# precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.indexed_iterate), Tuple{QuoteNode, Expr}, Int64})
#= 6.5 ms =# precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.indexed_iterate), Tuple{QuoteNode, Expr}, Int64, Int64})
#= 17.8 ms =# precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.Threads._threadsfor), Expr, Expr, Symbol})
#= 15.1 ms =# precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.Threads.default_func), Expr, Symbol, Expr})
#= 298.8 ms =# precompile(Tuple{typeof(Main.main), Int64})
#= 86.0 ms =# precompile(Tuple{Base.Threads.var"#threading_run##0#threading_run##1"{Main.var"#mul_by_f!##0#mul_by_f!##1"{Main.var"#mul_by_f!##2#mul_by_f!##3"{typeof(Main.A), Array{Float64, 1}, Array{Float64, 1}, Int64, Base.UnitRange{Int64}}}, Int64}})
#= 61.9 ms =# precompile(Tuple{Base.Threads.var"#threading_run##0#threading_run##1"{Main.var"#mul_by_f!##0#mul_by_f!##1"{Main.var"#mul_by_f!##2#mul_by_f!##3"{typeof(Main.At), Array{Float64, 1}, Array{Float64, 1}, Int64, Base.UnitRange{Int64}}}, Int64}})
#= 5.9 ms =# precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.Ryu.writefixed), Float64, Int64})
1.274202174
#= 17.3 ms =# precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.should_use_main_entrypoint)}) # recompile

real	0m0,931s
user	0m1,661s
sys	0m0,144s

$ time julia +1.11.1 --trace-compile=stderr -- spectralnorm.julia-4.julia 55
precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.indexed_iterate), Tuple{QuoteNode, Expr}, Int64})
precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.indexed_iterate), Tuple{QuoteNode, Expr}, Int64, Int64})
precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.Threads._threadsfor), Expr, Expr, Symbol})
precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.Threads.default_func), Expr, Symbol, Expr})
[I'm not sure how slow this is here or how to time it] precompile(Tuple{typeof(Main.main), Int64})
[similar text] precompile(Tuple{Base.Threads.var"#1#2"{Main.var"#2#threadsfor_fun#2"{Main.var"#2#threadsfor_fun#1#3"{typeof(Main.A), Array{Float64, 1}, Array{Float64, 1}, Int64, Base.UnitRange{Int64}}}, Int64}})
[similar text] precompile(Tuple{Base.Threads.var"#1#2"{Main.var"#2#threadsfor_fun#2"{Main.var"#2#threadsfor_fun#1#3"{typeof(Main.At), Array{Float64, 1}, Array{Float64, 1}, Int64, Base.UnitRange{Int64}}}, Int64}})
[only here] precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.println), Base.TTY, String, Vararg{String}})

It's better on nightly, 1.14 will be awesome:

$ time julia +nightly -tauto --cpu-target=ivybridge --math-mode=ieee -- spectralnorm.julia-4.julia 5500
1.274224153

real	0m0,910s
user	0m5,366s
sys	0m0,171s
vibe@ryksugan:~$ time julia +1.13 -tauto --cpu-target=ivybridge --math-mode=ieee -- spectralnorm.julia-4.julia 5500
1.274224153

real	0m2,170s
user	0m6,995s
sys	0m0,344s

```

Other still fixed overheads mostly startup itself and printing numbers…:

```julia-auto
$ hyperfine 'julia +1.13 -e ""'
Benchmark 1: julia +1.13 -e ""
  Time (mean ± σ): 242.0 ms ± 14.8 ms [User: 158.8 ms, System: 95.6 ms]
  Range (min … max): 204.4 ms … 262.6 ms 12 runs

$ hyperfine 'julia +1.11.1 -e ""'
Benchmark 1: julia +1.11.1 -e ""
  Time (mean ± σ): 195.7 ms ± 12.8 ms [User: 132.7 ms, System: 70.6 ms]
  Range (min … max): 168.8 ms … 221.5 ms 15 runs

$ hyperfine 'julia +nightly -e ""'
Benchmark 1: julia +nightly -e ""
  Time (mean ± σ): 236.8 ms ± 16.4 ms [User: 132.9 ms, System: 101.8 ms]
  Range (min … max): 192.3 ms … 254.8 ms 12 runs

I thought I got precompilation for print and println fixed, but it needs to be more broad, floating-point numbers should be common...: 

$ julia +1.13 --trace-compile=stderr --trace-compile-timing -e 'println(1.2)'
#= 24.4 ms =# precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.println), Float64})
#= 59.6 ms =# precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.print), Base.TTY, Float64, String})

[Base.Ryu.writefixed was precompiled in 1.11.1 but isn't in 1.13 or 1.10, and used in the benchmark for lack of precompiled float printing.]

$ julia +1.13 --trace-compile=stderr --trace-compile-timing -e 'println(Base.Ryu.writefixed(1.2, 9))'
#= 13.1 ms =# precompile(Tuple{typeof(Base.Ryu.writefixed), Float64, Int64})

```

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![joa-quim](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/joa-quim/32/227_2.png) [@joa-quim](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/joa-quim)\
**Post date:** [September 14, 2026, 2:45pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343/20 "2026-09-14T14:45:49Z")

</div>

Overall I find that 1.13 is ~10% slower than 1.10 when compiling/_latencying_ the GMT.jl stuff (the CIs, when do not break for some network issue, show that well)

[Next page](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/congrats-for-julia-1-13/139343.md?page=2)