Hi, first of all let me say that I know this is a big subject, but I couldn’t find any serious discussion about it, so I’m asking here. I think it’s obvious that Julia has a really good philosophical basis, and I believe it has a lot of potential to grow and compete with all the other big languages…

I think Julia would be better off maintaining it’s focus on scientific computing (which is already a large and diverse application). There are always trade-offs to be made in language design and shifting Julia’s focus towards general-purpose computing would likely hurt some of it’s strengths when i…

If you want to bypass the package manager altogether, you can include the file containing a module declaration and do using .ModuleName But if there’s a mutual dependency, I’ll get WARNING: replacing module Whatever and who knows what kind of issues that might arise due to duplication. It’s ju…

How would the goals I outlined hurt any of its strengths? I can’t think of a reason…

[image] erezsh: Having to literally include files, and then import them separately, is awkward and inefficient… Are you sure that you are talking about Julia? Did you by any chance miss the everything about its package manager ?

[image] erezsh: But if there’s a mutual dependency, I’ll get WARNING: replacing module Whatever and who knows what kind of issues that might arise due to duplication. It’s just astonishing how unpolished the module system is in Julia compared to other languages. You only get a warning if you …

[image] erezsh: I couldn’t find a discussion about it [image] Compiler work priorities Internals & Design In response to I thought I might write a little post about the rough priorities of the compiler team: Correctness finding and fixing compiler and inferenc…

[image] erezsh: Performance, or: No integration of JIT and interpreter Even when you build an executable? I haven’t played with building an executable but I had assumed it compiled the code it could at that point. [image] erezsh: Imports As others have mentioned not sure what you mea…

[image] erezsh: However, I believe that presently, it’s still not ready to be used for most programming projects. Thanks for your comments, I always learn from these views. But, hard to discuss without clarity around what “most programming projects” are. The dynamic interactivity with develop…

[image] pixel27: Imports As others have mentioned not sure what you mean by this. I’ll chime in a little on this. Personally, I found the pacakge manager extremely confusing to use and had quite a bit of trouble understanding how it worked when reading through the manual. In fact, it frust…

Could you point out a few risks? I see absolutely none.

Discussion: Plans for Julia as a general-purpose language?

General Usage

Tamas_Papp November 8, 2019, 3:54pm 8

I am not sure that it is necessary to start another separate discussion.

Topic		Replies	Views
Not only for technical computing: changing the narrative around the usecase for Julia Community	52	11889	February 14, 2019
Julia motivation: why weren't Numpy, Scipy, Numba, good enough? Community history	120	84418	September 21, 2018
Ensure Julia is used to its full power New to Julia question , first-steps	100	7596	December 11, 2020
Question about Julia's goals Community question	41	3350	October 27, 2023
What don't you like about Julia for "serious work"? Community	176	25388	April 20, 2024

Discussion: Plans for Julia as a general-purpose language?

Related topics