3 ms·
> If you want a language that gives you nice, performant code on your first attempt, Julia is always a decent option. If Julia hasn't taken off yet (which I a
by dunefox 2y ago
> If you want a language that gives you nice, performant code on your first attempt, Julia is always a decent option.
If Julia hasn't taken off yet (which I am very sad about), I'm not sure why Mojo would. I'd rather have more resources invested into Julia.
- 0cf8612b2e1e 2y agoJulia has to bootstrap an ecosystem. If mojo can borrow all of the successful Python libraries, that is worth a lot. Still an enormous uphill battle, but slightly more tractable. Regardless, it is a rough place to be - for a staggering number of uses, Python is fast enough. The organizations who absolutely require top tier performance already have the ability to use FFI. Instagram runs on Django and I believe is still used for YouTube.
- ivell 2y agoOTOH,Rust has shown that there is a reasonable size market for performant, safe system programming languages. I suspect it is being held back from larger adoption due to its complexity. I see an opportunity for Mojo to get into that, with a simpler model and ability to gradually opt in to more complex but high performance parts of the language. Mojo has a good chance to target Python programmers who would have gone for Go or Java for better performance, and C++ programmers who need something like Rust, but simpler.
- pjmlp 2y agoDepends on what one means regarding taking off, several industries are quite happy with it. https://info.juliahub.com/case-studies https://info.juliahub.com/case-studies Any language designer would be crying of joy if their language had so few users as Julia is currently having.