What's stopping Julia from being reasonably usable to make actual applications? It's been awhile since I've touched it, but I ain't seeing a whole lot in the way of obstacles there — just less inertia.
Presumably inertia and ecosystem size (but that's a follow on of inertia). When Julia came out Python already had traction for ~most things.
Keep in mind that it went with 1 based indexes to make the switch easy for Matlab types. I'm not sure if that was a good or bad move for the long term. I'm sure it got some people to move who otherwise wouldn't have but conversely there are also people like me who rejected it outright as a result (after suffering at the hands of 1 based indexing in Matlab I will never touch those again if I have any say in the matter).
I've considered switching to it a few times since seeing that they added variable indexes but Python works well enough. Honestly if I were going to the trouble of switching I'd much rather use Common Lisp or R5RS. The nearest miss for me is probably Chicken, where you can seamlessly inline C code but (fatally) not C++ templates.
If I ever encounter "Chicken, except Rust" I will probably switch to that for most things.
> My conclusion after using Julia for many years is that there are too many correctness and composability bugs throughout the ecosystem to justify using it in just about any context where correctness matters.
I was excited about julia as an application development language when it first came out, but the language and ecosystem seem to be targeting long-running processes. there was just a ton of latency in build time and startup time for things like scripts and applications, so I moved on.
It's actually better suited IMO, being a compiled language. I'm not sure how anyone could consider the current train wreck of getting python code just to run "actual applications." uv is great and all, but many of these "actual applications" don't use it.
yellowapple|10 days ago
fc417fc802|10 days ago
Keep in mind that it went with 1 based indexes to make the switch easy for Matlab types. I'm not sure if that was a good or bad move for the long term. I'm sure it got some people to move who otherwise wouldn't have but conversely there are also people like me who rejected it outright as a result (after suffering at the hands of 1 based indexing in Matlab I will never touch those again if I have any say in the matter).
I've considered switching to it a few times since seeing that they added variable indexes but Python works well enough. Honestly if I were going to the trouble of switching I'd much rather use Common Lisp or R5RS. The nearest miss for me is probably Chicken, where you can seamlessly inline C code but (fatally) not C++ templates.
If I ever encounter "Chicken, except Rust" I will probably switch to that for most things.
mathisfun123|10 days ago
> My conclusion after using Julia for many years is that there are too many correctness and composability bugs throughout the ecosystem to justify using it in just about any context where correctness matters.
zem|9 days ago
zamalek|10 days ago
pjmlp|9 days ago
Most "Python" applications are actually bindings to C, C++ and Fortran code doing the real work.
SJC_Hacker|9 days ago
Use C, C++ or Fortran for the heavy lifting, and Python for UI/business logic/non-high perf stuff for rapid app development.