4 ms·
As a somewhat reluctant user of Python for scientific computing, the main thing that keeps me from trying Julia is that it seems to have a severe case of featur
by scythe 3y ago
As a somewhat reluctant user of Python for scientific computing, the main thing that keeps me from trying Julia is that it seems to have a severe case of featuritis. I never wanted or needed my convenience language to try to be a C++ replacement, and the hodgepodge of syntax I see when I look at Julia samples is nauseating.
Replacing Python is not practical right now because it is more comfortable to use a language that doesn't try to be everything to everyone, and that means that it will be built on a base language — in Python's case, C. That ground is shifting, and nobody is sure if the new base will be Rust, Zig, something else, or if it will all blow over and C will come back. So the space isn't being targeted very much.
- Hasnep 3y agoIt's interesting you say that because looking at large calculations in Python using numpy can be pretty nauseating. The only big thing to learn with Julia is the broadcasting syntax, other than that, Julia has a good macro system, so sometimes you see syntax that doesn't make sense without knowing what the macro does.
- freilanzer 3y ago> I never wanted or needed my convenience language to try to be a C++ replacement Strange as that is one of the reasons why Julia exists - fast Python. > and the hodgepodge of syntax I see when I look at Julia samples is nauseating. I honestly like the syntax. OTOH I dislike Pythons syntax somewhat.
- pjmlp 3y agoI know Python since 1.6, and use it as main scripting language when on UNIX platforms, as if Python 3.11 versus 1.6 isn't full of featuritis as well.