News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Why Julia. Parent comment

Re:Why Julia by agumonkey on Saturday February 23, 2019 @10:18AM (#19233650)
Yeah I get it, it's inconvenient. But I taking the jvm thing again, I think julia's value is outside of this way of doing things.

Out of curiosity I timed ocaml

    $ time echo 'let x = "1" in print_endline(x)' |  ocaml -stdin - 
    1
    
    real    0m0.045s
    user    0m0.039s
    sys     0m0.007s
I thought julia init time was due to type checking phase but ocaml seems to have no issue, even with non zero code:

     $ time echo 'let l = [1;2;3;4] in let m = List.map (fun x -> x*x) l in print_int(List.length(m))' |  ocaml -stdin - 
     4
     real    0m0.050s
     user    0m0.040s
     sys     0m0.011s
Sad, I liked a lot of Julia features..

ps: this hints at the init time being constant recompilation of its core https://www.reddit.com/r/Julia/comments/4c09m1/julia_045_sta... and they were thinking (2 years ago) of caching..

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Julia by dnautics on Saturday February 23, 2019 @12:31PM (#19234344)
What were you planning to use Julia for where its init time matters?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Julia by agumonkey on Saturday February 23, 2019 @01:21PM (#19234669)
Nothing, i'm just curious [1] about Julia. I never used it.

[1]It's just because i find the science python stack a bit absurd.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Julia by krull10 on Saturday February 23, 2019 @02:06PM (#19234942)
Right now, using is as a “quick” command line utility for solving small problems is probably not a good Julia work flow (unless the overhead you mention doesn’t matter to your application). Where it shines is for longer-running or repeated computations where the initial compilation cost of starting a new REPL doesn’t matter.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why Julia by agumonkey on Saturday February 23, 2019 @03:04PM (#19235191)
Preaching the convinced
[ Parent | on HN ]