News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why I am betting on Julia (2014) by lmm on Monday April 18, 2016 @03:56AM (#11518352)
Language design is vital for a language that can evolve. If you build a language for "cowboys" with the immediately-useful functionality that you can see, but without the "language geeks" insisting on the underlying principles, you end up with a language like perl - one that can dominate a particular use case for a while, but will be virtually impossible to evolve, and ultimately fall out of favour as it's overtaken by languages with firmer foundations.

That's why I'm betting on the strongly-typed functional tradition - OCaml/Haskell/etc. These language already have the killer feature from this article: they can be (almost) as expressive as Python and (almost) as performant as (naive) C++. But they also have really solid design with a lot of thought put into it that will let them evolve to meet the needs of the future.

Re:Why I am betting on Julia (2014) by junke on Monday April 18, 2016 @05:09AM (#11518600)
Julia stands definitely on firm foundations, has a solid design and is strongly-typed too.
Re:Why I am betting on Julia (2014) by 9981721212 on Monday April 18, 2016 @05:22AM (#11518646)
Strongly typed and dynamically typed, which means that you can get runtime errors. Also, the "type system" with "dependent types" is really just equivalent to an ML datatype that's dynamically type checked.

I'm a bit mystified with respect to what passes as research in the field of type systems for dynamic languages.

Re:Why I am betting on Julia (2014) by lmm on Monday April 18, 2016 @05:39AM (#11518689)
Then why's it positioned as a numerical/datascience language rather than a general-purpose language?
Re:Why I am betting on Julia (2014) by junke on Monday April 18, 2016 @06:52AM (#11518902)
Do you see a contradiction between having a good design and having a specific purpose?
Re:Why I am betting on Julia (2014) by lmm on Monday April 18, 2016 @06:59AM (#11518930)
Yes. I think good programming language design is necessarily general, and the best way to achieve that is with a language that's been validated in widely varied domains. Certainly my experience is that specialized languages are consistently worse than general-purpose ones.
Re:Why I am betting on Julia (2014) by junke on Monday April 18, 2016 @07:18AM (#11518994)
Julia is general-purpose, but there is a deliberate orientation towards scientific computing. That's a partly non-technical choice about what is going to be optimized in priority.

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17433435/what-makes-juli...