# lhe/Biofast benchmark | FASTQ parsing \[Julia,Nim,Crystal,Python,...\]

**URL:** https://discourse.julialang.org/t/lhe-biofast-benchmark-fastq-parsing-julia-nim-crystal-python/39747
**Category:** Biology, Health, and Medicine
**Tags:** performance, benchmark, community, biology
**Created:** [May 19, 2020, 11:16am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/lhe-biofast-benchmark-fastq-parsing-julia-nim-crystal-python/39747 "2020-05-19T11:16:23Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 49

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![lh3](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/lh3/32/25530_2.png) [@lh3](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/lh3)
#### Post date: [May 25, 2020, 7:33pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/lhe-biofast-benchmark-fastq-parsing-julia-nim-crystal-python/39747/49 "2020-05-25T19:33:58Z")

</div>

It does me no good to provoke the Julia community here. I will only ask a question: do you anticipate a python2-to-3 like massive breaking changes in the next 5 to 10 years? By “massive breaking changes”, I mean a big fraction of existing code will stop working. I saw brief responses from some of you on hacker news/reddit. The answer was yes. Is that still true? Or maybe those responses don’t represent the opinion of the core Julia devs?

EDIT: also [this thread](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/thoughts-on-eventual-julia-2-0-transition/15756/) really worries me. Like “Julia 2.0 will come with features that people are dying to have that aren’t possible without breaking things”.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/lhe-biofast-benchmark-fastq-parsing-julia-nim-crystal-python/39747)._