2 ms·
Slim binaries and better static compilation were mentioned as big future features in the closing remarks, so that'd be a good one to watch - a lot of the people
by thatcherc 3y ago
Slim binaries and better static compilation were mentioned as big future features in the closing remarks, so that'd be a good one to watch - a lot of the people there working in embedded, robotics, or plane satellite projects were excited about those.
There weren't any talks I saw where anyone was actually running Julia in space, but Ronan Chagas' "Attitude control subsystem development using Julia" and Corbin Klett's "Realtime embedded systems testing with Julia" both get pretty close and point out reasons why you wouldn't quite want to run Julia on a satellite or plane just yet. Hopefully the videos capture the questions from the audience because there were some good followups!
- coldtea 3y agoThese sound like being about Julia proper. How does that fit with your initial "If JuliaCon last week is any indication, there might be more Lisp in space in the future"? Is this about some Lisp written in Julia? Some Lisp with interoperability with Julia? Or it's based on considering Julia itself a Lisp for some reason?
- adgjlsfhk1 3y agoI'm assuming OP was considering Julia as a pseudo-lisp. Julia doesn't look at all like a Lisp from the outside (no S-exprs except with (https://github.com/swadey/LispREPL.jl https://github.com/swadey/LispREPL.jl) but it takes many of Lisp's deeper lessons. It's (somewhat) homoiconic (see https://stackoverflow.com/questions/31733766/in-what-sense-are-languages-like-elixir-and-julia-homoiconic/31734725#31734725 https://stackoverflow.com/questions/31733766/in-what-sense-a...), has an AST based macro system, and is an expression based language (no statements, everything returns a value), and has first class functions and types. Also multiple dispatch comes from taking CLOS/Dylan and getting rid of some of the parts that make a compiler writer hate you.