I understand your concerns better now. Here's my input for what it's worth: (1) List comprehensions are a mess and a recognized problem with the existing compi

I understand your concerns better now. Here's my input for what it's worth: (1) List comprehensions are a mess and a recognized problem with the existing compiler. There's a lot of work that's been done to fix the erratic typing of comprehensions. As such, I am sure that this concern will be resolved before 1.0. I would bet that it will be resolved much sooner than that. (2) I don't really believe that scientists can't learn that Array(Int, 1) and Array(Float64, 1) do different things. This seems like a place where education can be very effective. (3) Julia's error messages are indeed generally poor. I'm hopeful that we'll see a push towards Elm-quality error messages in the future: http://elm-lang.org/blog/compilers-as-assistants http://elm-lang.org/blog/compilers-as-assistants (4) The core problem with your fixed size array example is that you're building it on top of the wrong primitives. Julia's Array isn't a suitable data structure for building up fixed-length arrays: Julia's Array is more like C++ std::vector than like C's arrays. To build a real fixed length array, you need to build it on top of lower-level primitives. Many people are already working on that problem. Putting it all together, I think your concerns all reflect real problems with the language. You may be better off waiting until Julia 1.0 comes out.