The release of Julia 2.0 could spark additional interest in the Julia community and thus, provide a unique opportunity to promote Julia. What steps should the Julia community take from now until the release of Julia 2.0 to bring Julia to the next level of popularity?

Exactly. It seems to me that things are actually going fine. We just need to keep that moving. Julia is almost entirely built on pull requests to base and packages. Code, docs whatever: PRs are where things actually happen and real decisions and changes are made. Not in these threads. So improving…

[image] DNF: “An easier C++” is not targeted at C++ programmers who want something easier, but coders who are running up against performance issues in their language of choice, and who find C++/Rust/etc. daunting. Agreed. I think it could help promote Julia as a simpler C++ rather than a fast…

[image] Eben60: No, it doesn’t, you can very well use Revise just with scripts. Interested how? - probably not. [image] ShalokShalom: I had been made aware about this workflow by that video [image] ShalokShalom: If this is, how you imagine As I guessed, you appear to be not inte…

[image] ShalokShalom: Reproducible environments that users can download, install and use. Hmm, not sure what you mean. Project environments are perfectly reproducible by either putting tight bounds on dependencies, or shipping code with a manifest [1] . Getting a dev environment up and running…

[image] xiaoxi: I think it could help promote Julia as a simpler C++ rather than a faster Python. You have just seen, that it could be just as likely been considered, that Zig already fulfills that role. And that is a very different language, then Julia. So, I think any notion of “Julia is …

I’ll make a radical proposal: let’s close this thread. It’s become a kind of airing of grievances thread and it has the constant potential to turn into something much worse, but I’m not confident that it has any remaining potential to turn into something much better.

[image] ShalokShalom: @Eben60 You have a typo, its include("myscript.jl") No, it is includet with the t. That’s a Revise function, meaning “include and track”.

[image] ShalokShalom: To have a dev container, or something similar, as part of the official installation instructions. Julia is readily available as a Dev Container from inside VSCode! Just tried it out; worked immediately. I concur though, that it might not be as well advertised as it coul…

That’s not true, I was able to play with Julia just by installing Julia and the Julia vscode extension, that’s it. Anyway creating a new package of a matter of writing generate mypackage I don’t see an issue here

I would prefer to require registered packages to have every exported function and the corresponding arguments and return type to be documented, with reasonable exceptions for methods already documented. I’m not sure if the documentation rate quoted in this posting is still accurate, but it seems lo…

[image] johnmyleswhite: I’ll make a radical proposal: let’s close this thread. Before closing the thread, I would suggest one last thing. I hope the Julia community can revisit the topic of this thread each year through a roundtable at Julia Con or a question in the annual survey.

What steps should the Julia community take to bring Julia to the next level of popularity?

Community

lmiq September 4, 2023, 11:37am 595

No, it is includet with the t. That’s a Revise function, meaning “include and track”.

Making Revise the default?

Topic		Replies	Views
What can we do to make Julia grow fast? Community	114	13747	November 16, 2018
How do we Julians win big when the situation is so unfair? Community	100	6223	November 22, 2023
Can juliac increase julia adoption? General Usage question	61	3972	April 14, 2025
Designated Target Audience of Julia 1.0? Community	152	11267	July 25, 2018
Julia losing popularity among Data Science users (KDnuggets Software Poll) Community	146	20733	June 23, 2018

What steps should the Julia community take to bring Julia to the next level of popularity?

Related topics