4 ms·

What does indexing syntax have to do with Julia having a rough history of correctness bugs and footguns?

• Joel_Mckay 11mo ago
  Sure, all software is terrible if looking at bug frequency history... https://github.com/python/cpython/issues https://github.com/python/cpython/issues Griefers ranting about years old _closed_ tickets on v1.0.5 versions on a blog as some sort of proof of lameness... is a poorly structured argument. Julia includes regression testing features built into even its plotting library output, and thus issues usually stay resolved due to pedantic reproducibility. Also, running sanity-checks in any llvm language code is usually wise. Best of luck =3
  • pphysch 11mo ago
    Just saying, "other languages have bug reports" is a exceptionally poor way to promote Julia =3
    • Joel_Mckay 11mo ago
      To be blunt: Moores law is now effectively dead, and chasing the monolithic philosophy with lazy monads will eventually limit your options. Languages like Julia trivially handle conditional parallelism much more cleanly with the broadcast operator, and transparent remote host process instancing over ssh (still needs a lot of work to reach OTP like cluster functionality.) Much like Go, library resources ported into the native language quietly moves devs away from the same polyglot issues that hit Python. Best of luck. =3