5 ms·
Julia isn't (currently) targeted as a general-purpose programming language, but there's nothing in the core language that's specialized for scientific computing
by simonster 13y ago
Julia isn't (currently) targeted as a general-purpose programming language, but there's nothing in the core language that's specialized for scientific computing. While the linear algebra libraries etc. are part of the standard library, they're either written in Julia or wrappers for external projects. Its closest relative in terms of paradigm is might be Dylan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dylan_programming_language http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dylan_programming_language), which Apple intended as a lispy general-purpose language for the Newton. IMHO, making it useful in the domains where people use Clojure is really just a matter of library support (and whether you can tolerate 1-based indexing).
- tel 13y agoWhile that's true, I can't believe that given its numerical bent it'll take anything less than an incredible push to move it to a more general playing field.
- StefanKarpinski 13y agoShh! Don't tell anyone but all computing is numerical computing.
- tel 13y agoI... disagree. Strongly? In fact almost feel the opposite, that "numerical work" is a subset of computing. What would you call a lambda calculus reducer numerically?