michaelfiano

5 ms·

1.
by michaelfiano 4y ago
I have given up on portability a long time ago. I value the concision of Julia code, the "automatically fast by default due to the great JIT compiler and type inference engine", and the "everything is zero-runtime overhead ge
2.
by michaelfiano 4y ago
I used Clojure years ago and I did not like it. I don't have much more to say other than it tries to force me into a particular programming paradigm and isn't very expressive.
3.
by michaelfiano 4y ago
1) Julia will be my primary programming language for the foreseeable future. However, I am invested in a large CL project that has been on hiatus for a couple years, that will be starting back up soon. I will however only be working on that
4.
by michaelfiano 4y ago
Only the parser is, and it was recently re-written in Julia and in the process of being merged.
5.
by michaelfiano 4y ago
I would say it has improved, but it very much hurts me to watch some conversations. Lots of passive aggressiveness and stubborn people stuck with these old habits.
6.
by michaelfiano 4y ago
So far, mostly this: https://github.com/mfiano/CoherentNoise.jl
7.
by michaelfiano 4y ago
1) There is much more to the interactive development experience than the REPL. As mentioned in the article, the debugger and inspector are key parts of this workflow. 3) It's not that software is released too far apart, it's that
8.
by michaelfiano 4y ago
Author here. I am a relative beginner to Julia, having only used it seriously for a few months. For those familiar with Common Lisp, I will try to answer any questions you may have in this thread, that weren't addressed in the article.
9.
by michaelfiano 4y ago
Which Lisp? What applications do you think it is slow at? Hint: It can be faster than C due to compiler macros, and infact, its regular expression engine is much faster than Perl's, which is written in C, just to give a concrete exampl
10.
by michaelfiano 4y ago
Author here. How about Common Lisp, what the article talks about? :)