[image] What steps should the Julia community take to bring Julia to the next level of popularity? Yep. And the complex setup that it requires, is a non-solution. I would rather ditch the entire language, then using that. I can, in every single language, popular and non-popular, fire up VS Cod…

My main issue with includet is that in workflows which use a module not in a package (e.g. includet("MyModule.jl"); import MyModule), as is common in scripting, the script code itself needs to depend on Revise. It is not enough for the user to have Revise loaded, since the script code itself needs t…

We could also revisit to ship Revise in the VS Code extension by default and make it available in the REPL there. I started that at some point and got stuck somewhere, but that would probably go a fair way to make it available to a lot of folks.

One thing to be aware of is there’s a selection bias with the user survey. I highly doubt the survey captures the “layman” user of Julia – even I’ve only taken the survey once and I’ve been using Julia since 2015-ish. The survey is so heavy, that even though I’ve opened it a few other times I’ve g…

[image] GregVernon: The survey is so heavy, that even though I’ve opened it a few other times I’ve given up partway through. Sounds like the next survey could be a bit smaller? Do you think its worth it, opening up a post about this as well? I also like contributing to surveys, and get tired …

You can use if isdefined(Main, :Revise) includet("script.jl") else include("script.jl") end

[image] GregVernon: The general recommendation I’ve seen for using Julia is to not add any packages to your base Julia installation, instead use projects if you need additional packages. I certainly don’t advise that. I have a substantial number of “developer” packages in my default environme…

[image] ChrisRackauckas: This thread shows that it is possible for someone who thinks they are informed in the language to miss a pretty crucial step to the “shadow standard installation”: let’s get rid of the shadow part and just make it standard? As an anecdote, I’ve been using Julia for 3-…

Same, the few times I have used Revise.jl I just did the exact same thing as you and found it to not be all that beneficial, probably because I’ve not been using includet

I would NOT like Revise be used as default, or added to Base, for one reason. But see opposite argument of mine below. I’m trying to make Julia’s sysimage (and Base preferably) smaller, I’m already made startup 30% faster, so I would fear this addition, and it making it slower. This applies for ru…

I don’t think includet should be the default because it is somewhat dangerous: It hides bugs in the sense that it results in misleading error messages. I often need to replace includet with include before I see the real error message of a problem.

Making Revise the default?

Internals & Design

tim.holy September 4, 2023, 7:09pm 18

I certainly don’t advise that. I have a substantial number of “developer” packages in my default environment; project-specific packages (i.e., things that do certain computations, etc) go in the project.

Topic		Replies	Views
[ANN] Higher productivity (fewer Julia restarts) with Revise.jl Community package , announcement , productivity , development	52	8692	April 30, 2018
[ANN] Revise 3.0: faster and better Package Announcements revise	12	3015	September 16, 2020
Trying and trying with Revise New to Julia	44	5069	August 30, 2019
Are Revise, PackageCompiler, and Pkg "part of Julia", and how do we better share them? Internals & Design	46	4318	October 25, 2023
Revise cannot transform my dataset Performance performance , dataframes , revise	23	1576	May 9, 2020

Making Revise the default?

Related topics