3 ms·

I like Julia because of the trivial 10x performance improvements I get over writing similar code in Python/numpy. What I don't like is how Julia attempts to fo

I like Julia because of the trivial 10x performance improvements I get over writing similar code in Python/numpy. What I don't like is how Julia attempts to force you into a REPL workflow. Everything is optimized for REPL work. I just want to write a script in a text editor and run it from the command line. Please make this easy for me. (Other HN comments have said this in more detail, for example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27310747 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27310747.)

jakobnissen 5y ago
It's really hard to do, because having a command-line centered development experience with Julia is a complete nonstarter until compile time latency is near zero. And that's just really, really hard, and unlikely to happen, at least any time soon.
- cbkeller 5y ago
  Hopefully eventually
totalperspectiv 5y ago
That is an extremely well put comment in the link. Thanks for sharing it.
gugagore 5y ago
> In programming I tend to think the whole computer and its OS and so on as the programming tool. My impression is that for Julia folks Julia is something totally separate from anything else in the computer. But I don't understand why. Is it that its felt that changing syntax on the fly is too cognitively demanding or something? This is something that one gets used to very fast. This comment really does not resonate with me. It sounds like a criticism of Smalltalk, not Julia. Not sure what it means to change "syntax on the fly", but that does sound like the sort of design that is maximally flexible, at a considerable cost to readability. Macros already allow you to embed DSLs (as long as they parse), and almost everyone agree that they should be used sparingly. > And also tends to ease the IMHO weird hung-ups on syntax. In fact, I think Julia has made some (IMHO misguided) syntactic decisions because they just want to do something differently from Python just for the sake of being different. I find this totally senseless. I am not aware of any decision that is done just for the sake of being different. If there are any, then yes that's senseless.
- ummonk 5y ago
  > Not sure what it means to change "syntax on the fly" GP meant that Julia enthusiasts seem to dislike the cognitive overhead of switching between languages (e.g. Bash scripts, SQL, C code, Python scripts, and as GP wants, Julia scripts as well) while doing multi-language development using the whole Unix computer as a programming tool. As opposed to doing everything in a Julia REPL.
systemvoltage 5y ago
That comment you linked is amazing - it steps back a little bit and gets our head of out the dirt to see the horizon. As a bunch of programming ostriches try to muck about this or that - the author instructively dictates that general purpose programming languages are part of the toolbox to get the job done...on an operating system of choice. We need to listen to people that have gone through the experience of putting complex systems together and their learnings are immeasurably valuable. This is the eternal balance of theoriticians and practioners. It also further cements something that I always felt but can be offputting to some people - Julia is an academic language used by academicians. From a software engineering perspective (not computer science, mind you), there is much to be desired.

jakobnissen 5y ago

It's really hard to do, because having a command-line centered development experience with Julia is a complete nonstarter until compile time latency is near zero. And that's just really, really hard, and unlikely to happen, at least any time soon.

cbkeller 5y ago
Hopefully eventually

totalperspectiv 5y ago

That is an extremely well put comment in the link. Thanks for sharing it.

gugagore 5y ago

> In programming I tend to think the whole computer and its OS and so on as the programming tool. My impression is that for Julia folks Julia is something totally separate from anything else in the computer. But I don't understand why. Is it that its felt that changing syntax on the fly is too cognitively demanding or something? This is something that one gets used to very fast. This comment really does not resonate with me. It sounds like a criticism of Smalltalk, not Julia. Not sure what it means to change "syntax on the fly", but that does sound like the sort of design that is maximally flexible, at a considerable cost to readability. Macros already allow you to embed DSLs (as long as they parse), and almost everyone agree that they should be used sparingly. > And also tends to ease the IMHO weird hung-ups on syntax. In fact, I think Julia has made some (IMHO misguided) syntactic decisions because they just want to do something differently from Python just for the sake of being different. I find this totally senseless. I am not aware of any decision that is done just for the sake of being different. If there are any, then yes that's senseless.

ummonk 5y ago
> Not sure what it means to change "syntax on the fly" GP meant that Julia enthusiasts seem to dislike the cognitive overhead of switching between languages (e.g. Bash scripts, SQL, C code, Python scripts, and as GP wants, Julia scripts as well) while doing multi-language development using the whole Unix computer as a programming tool. As opposed to doing everything in a Julia REPL.

systemvoltage 5y ago

That comment you linked is amazing - it steps back a little bit and gets our head of out the dirt to see the horizon. As a bunch of programming ostriches try to muck about this or that - the author instructively dictates that general purpose programming languages are part of the toolbox to get the job done...on an operating system of choice. We need to listen to people that have gone through the experience of putting complex systems together and their learnings are immeasurably valuable. This is the eternal balance of theoriticians and practioners. It also further cements something that I always felt but can be offputting to some people - Julia is an academic language used by academicians. From a software engineering perspective (not computer science, mind you), there is much to be desired.