You are exemplifying one of the points from my original post quite well though, so thanks, I guess.

For others who might not know you as a co-creator of the language with a strong financial interest in its success, don't you think your comments on Julia ought to carry a disclaimer?

Your group have clearly done fantastic work, but having such centralised (and "vocal") management makes it feel more like Julia is a start-up whose product is a language, rather than a language which a spin-out company is commercialising a bit. I trust the former far less than the latter.

Yes! You can find them all over. https://brainstation.io/career-guides/who-uses-python-today#.... for example. People compile incomplete lists for the answer of "do people use X?" It's never expected that the lists are complete. This is the most bizarre comment thread I've ever read.

> but having such centralised (and "vocal") management makes it feel more like Julia is a start-up whose product is a language, rather than a language which a spin-out company is commercialising a bit

Okay... then just read a different source? There's tons of these things online. Stefan just referenced the one he knows the URL of because he's involved with it. But here's a random one. https://www.datacamp.com/blog/the-rise-of-julia-is-it-worth-.... Each package ecosystem tends to have a list, like SciML has a (very incomplete, probably less than 2% listed here according to analytics) list https://sciml.ai/showcase/. There's lists all over.