2 ms·

as i said i think that Julia is an exciting project in the scientific computing space. my statements were not directed against julia or any other language. i ju

as i said i think that Julia is an exciting project in the scientific computing space. my statements were not directed against julia or any other language. i just happen to think that common lisp also has great potential for scientific computing, one that can appeal to scientists who want to be software engineers also. for those that just want to crunch numbers right now python is a first reference then julia, imho. however, i sincerely hope that julia overtakes python having the ability to be self hosted is definitely not ideological. [* here is a hypothetical question that can be asked: would a julia programmer be more powerful if llvm was written in julia? i think the answer is clear that they would be *] common lisp is a language specification. it does not have an official implementation, although by far the most popular one is sbcl. in fact there is an implementation CLASP[0] that is hosted on llvm [0] https://github.com/clasp-developers/clasp https://github.com/clasp-developers/clasp [*...*] enclosed part added to the response subsequently to initial posting

eigenspace 5y ago
Yes, and sorry if I also came off as combative here, it was not my intention either. I've used some Common Lisp before I got into Julia (though I never got super proficient with it) and I think it's an excellent language and it's too bad it doesn't get more attention. I just wanted to share what I think is cool about julia from a metaprogramming point of view, which I think is actually its greatest strength. > here is a hypothetical question that can be asked: would a julia programmer be more powerful if llvm was written in julia? i think the answer is clear that they would be Sure, I'd agree it'd be great if LLVM was written in julia. However, I also don't think it's a very high priority because there are all sorts of ways to basically slap LLVM's hands out of the way and say "no, I'll just do this part myself." E.g. consider LoopVectorization.jl [1] which is doing some very advanced program transformations that would normally be done at the LLVM (or lower) level. This package is written in pure Julia and is all about bypassing LLVM's pipelines and creating hyper efficient microkernels that are competitive with the handwritten assembly in BLAS systems. To your point, yes Chris' life likely would have been easier here if LLVM was written in julia, but also he managed to create this with a lot less man-power in a lot less time than anything like it that I know of, and it's screaming fast so I don't think it was such a huge impediment for him that LLVM wasn't implemented in julia. [1] https://github.com/JuliaSIMD/LoopVectorization.jl https://github.com/JuliaSIMD/LoopVectorization.jl
- medo-bear 5y ago
  great! i think that as far as scientific computing is concerned one has every right to be excited about julia. it is impressive how much work is being done in such a short time. i first came across it in 2015/6 and i am very happy about how its ecosystem evolved. i use julia and will continue to use it this is what i would advise given the current state of affairs in machine learning * use tensorflow / pytorch / pyro for industrial purposes. otherwise know what you are doing ! * use julia and its ecosystem for academic/research purposes. universities should be at the cutting edge of research * use anything else if you want to experiment deeply. here is where i see the value of common lisp

eigenspace 5y ago

Yes, and sorry if I also came off as combative here, it was not my intention either. I've used some Common Lisp before I got into Julia (though I never got super proficient with it) and I think it's an excellent language and it's too bad it doesn't get more attention. I just wanted to share what I think is cool about julia from a metaprogramming point of view, which I think is actually its greatest strength. > here is a hypothetical question that can be asked: would a julia programmer be more powerful if llvm was written in julia? i think the answer is clear that they would be Sure, I'd agree it'd be great if LLVM was written in julia. However, I also don't think it's a very high priority because there are all sorts of ways to basically slap LLVM's hands out of the way and say "no, I'll just do this part myself." E.g. consider LoopVectorization.jl [1] which is doing some very advanced program transformations that would normally be done at the LLVM (or lower) level. This package is written in pure Julia and is all about bypassing LLVM's pipelines and creating hyper efficient microkernels that are competitive with the handwritten assembly in BLAS systems. To your point, yes Chris' life likely would have been easier here if LLVM was written in julia, but also he managed to create this with a lot less man-power in a lot less time than anything like it that I know of, and it's screaming fast so I don't think it was such a huge impediment for him that LLVM wasn't implemented in julia. [1] https://github.com/JuliaSIMD/LoopVectorization.jl https://github.com/JuliaSIMD/LoopVectorization.jl

medo-bear 5y ago
great! i think that as far as scientific computing is concerned one has every right to be excited about julia. it is impressive how much work is being done in such a short time. i first came across it in 2015/6 and i am very happy about how its ecosystem evolved. i use julia and will continue to use it this is what i would advise given the current state of affairs in machine learning * use tensorflow / pytorch / pyro for industrial purposes. otherwise know what you are doing ! * use julia and its ecosystem for academic/research purposes. universities should be at the cutting edge of research * use anything else if you want to experiment deeply. here is where i see the value of common lisp