dunefox

61 ms·

811.
by dunefox 6y ago
> If you have hard water, you'd know just how silly that question is. Everyone descales their kettles at some point, but we don't want to do it every other day. That's too much effort for making coffee or tea. I have very
812.
by dunefox 6y ago
> making it difficult to clean If scale == lime then vinegar gets rid of it easily.
813.
by dunefox 6y ago
It's almost as if nulls and Exceptions aren't optimal for modelling missing states and faulty logic.
814.
by dunefox 6y ago
It seems like a great language; I'm going to look into it this year - maybe for advent of code or some data science/ML stuff. For some annoyances there is F#+: https://fsprojects.github.io/FSharpPlus/
815.
by dunefox 6y ago
Because we already pay taxes and a monthly healthcare fee for that...
816.
by dunefox 6y ago
Definitely don't use it if you need Unicode in any capacity. Also, there seem to be several standard libraries. Tooling is indeed quite confusing compared to other languages. The language itself seems good, though.
817.
Diffeqflux.jl – A Julia Library for Neural Differential Equations(julialang.org)
3 points by dunefox 6y ago|0 comments
818.
by dunefox 6y ago
But that's unrelated to "social justice", isn't it? It is idiotic nonetheless.
819.
by dunefox 6y ago
Like what?
820.
by dunefox 6y ago
That's actually a genius idea. I wonder how much money is wasted on such things.
821.
by dunefox 6y ago
Heh. Fortunately, I don't work there anymore.
822.
by dunefox 6y ago
Fun doesn't make money.
823.
by dunefox 6y ago
At my last job I wasn't micro- but nano-managed - the "project manager" sometimes sat next to me and looked at me while I was debugging code. The IT sector definitely has its share of morons.
824.
by dunefox 6y ago
That seems like a niche case. Surely flattening arrays is faster.
825.
by dunefox 6y ago
They might have been published, but how successful are they? I have no idea, but it's very realistic that one publisher is more risk averse while another isn't. This doesn't say anything about the language, really.
826.
by dunefox 6y ago
Maybe that's where the almost comes from.
827.
by dunefox 6y ago
> to the inability to do otherwise trivial stuff in python Like what? > or the huge bottleneck of unpacking (star operator in python) In what sense is unpacking a bottleneck?
828.
by dunefox 6y ago
Yeah, I've used Python in university and before, for ML and DL, for scripting, at work... it's very inconsistent and annoying. The package management situation is horrible. Yet it's seen as this magical beginner friendly and
829.
by dunefox 6y ago
I'm not certain of what happened, I'm just recalling what I had read some time ago.
830.
by dunefox 6y ago
There's nothing wrong with using the tools you know. But IMO it's quite interesting to use languages that might just be a big improvement over how things have been done so far. I think Julia is such a language when compared to Pyt
831.
by dunefox 6y ago
What I meant with this is that Julia isn't intended as a bash replacement. You can write your code in Julia and circumvent the overhead of having to start up the interpreter every time. But if you try to execute it 100 times per second
832.
by dunefox 6y ago
Please show me a source where they outright refuse AOT compilation.
833.
by dunefox 6y ago
Are you fitting, evaluating, and plotting complex models 100 times per second? I would be quite okay with logging the results into a file and only plot it with python if this was the cost for using Julia, yes. This might not be for everybod
834.
by dunefox 6y ago
The project was pushed by Swifts creator and it failed supposedly because he left Google AFAIK, so for Julia it would most likely have worked out much better.
835.
by dunefox 6y ago
Hopes are free. If you want it to rise quicker you have to use it and contribute. "Why would I use it if few people do?" is quite paradoxical.
836.
by dunefox 6y ago
You can just use the wrappers. Also, many libraries are using wrappers where available. Julia allows you to not exclusively rely on C libraries because it is efficient enough to implement them in itself.
837.
by dunefox 6y ago
Nothing is stopping you from using the C library.
838.
by dunefox 6y ago
"Post-mortem" doesn't imply that it's dead? And also, of course there isn't a mass market for a book on a programming language that's not python and due to most learning material being available online. This is
839.
by dunefox 6y ago
> nothing beats a[floor(rnd() * len(a)] What's wrong with rand(a)?
840.
by dunefox 6y ago
Start up time for the interpreter is 0.13s for me: ~ time julia -E "1+1" What takes time is precompilation of packages and functions - with Julia 1.6 the precompilation is much faster now than before. Your bash script that calls J

More ›