3 ms·
Lispers might not like that it's not a Lisp, but I remember Luke Tierney also making a statement to the effect that the statisticians have spoken and they don't
by hatmatrix 1y ago
Lispers might not like that it's not a Lisp, but I remember Luke Tierney also making a statement to the effect that the statisticians have spoken and they don't prefer the Lisp syntax.
So Julia is a happy middle ground - MATLAB-like syntax with metaprogramming facilities (i.e., macros, access to ASTs). Its canonical implementation is JIT, but the community is working on allowing creation of medium-sized binaries (there has been much effort to reduce this footprint).
- eigenspace 1y agoJulia isn't a lisp, but I think it's the most lispy non-S-expression based language around these days. The language creators took the lessons from lisp very seriously, and it shares a lot of functionality and philosophy with lisps.
- hatmatrix 1y agoWell I think the original author was a fan of Lisp and implemented the first Julia parser in femtolisp, IIRC. (And femtolisp was a lightweight Lisp of his own.)
- Joel_Mckay 1y agoJulia is somewhat different: 1. readability with explicit broadcast operators 2. interoperability with other languages including R and Python 3. performance often exceeding numpy and C/C++ code 4. usability in numerous workflows: https://www.queryverse.org/ https://www.queryverse.org/ The idea of using Lisp or Prolog in a production environment doesn't sound fun at all. Yet, they do make some types of problems easier to handle. =3