5 ms·

I use Julia. I work in Computational Logistics but some of the code I write is personal. This week I have used Julia for running SQL against SQLite, manipulati

I use Julia. I work in Computational Logistics but some of the code I write is personal. This week I have used Julia for running SQL against SQLite, manipulating dictionaries, raytracing, statistical analysis, engineering problems, simplex optimization, processing data from Excel, k-means clustering. I'm pretty sure none of these would be classed as high-level math exactly, though some math is involved. Any it's not as strongly typed for writing code as you seem to think function fred(a, b) return a * b end would work to multiply its numeric arguments or concatenate string arguments but it would throw an error on mixed string / numeric arguments It also supports duck typing function jule(a, b) return a.value * b.value end will work no matter the types of a and b so long as they have the required attributes

qwertyuiop924 10y ago
So, is it doing type inference, or is it weakly typed? I don't know. I mean, if Julia works for you, that's great. But it seems a bit awkward to me, and until now (and even now), there was the array indices elephant in the room (it's the Lua problem: Even if you support zero-based arrays, it's not supported by convention). As a Scheme/Lua/JS/Python/Ruby/C/Whatever else programmer (I don't know them all well, but I like to keep my hand in), I just don't see what Julia gets me. But that's just me.
- SixSigma 10y ago
  A combination of type inference, just in time compiling and multiple dispatch. The function is compiled at run-time if the signature is not already compiled. I've not really found the 1 index much of a problem, makes translating other code a bit awkward. The new dynamic indexing scheme (0 based, -10 based, whatever) seems interesting. What Julia gets me is a stats / machine learning environment I had to awkwardly program in Octave.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    Neat. Like I said, I don't think I'll be picking it up, but I'm glad it works for you.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

qwertyuiop924 10y ago

So, is it doing type inference, or is it weakly typed? I don't know. I mean, if Julia works for you, that's great. But it seems a bit awkward to me, and until now (and even now), there was the array indices elephant in the room (it's the Lua problem: Even if you support zero-based arrays, it's not supported by convention). As a Scheme/Lua/JS/Python/Ruby/C/Whatever else programmer (I don't know them all well, but I like to keep my hand in), I just don't see what Julia gets me. But that's just me.

SixSigma 10y ago
A combination of type inference, just in time compiling and multiple dispatch. The function is compiled at run-time if the signature is not already compiled. I've not really found the 1 index much of a problem, makes translating other code a bit awkward. The new dynamic indexing scheme (0 based, -10 based, whatever) seems interesting. What Julia gets me is a stats / machine learning environment I had to awkwardly program in Octave.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  Neat. Like I said, I don't think I'll be picking it up, but I'm glad it works for you.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]