News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Julia 1.9.0 lives up to its promise. Parent comment

Re:Julia 1.9.0 lives up to its promise by adgjlsfhk1 on Saturday May 13, 2023 @10:14PM (#35934740)
It's not 0.85 per file. It's 0.85 for the 50k files combined.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Julia 1.9.0 lives up to its promise by shakow on Saturday May 13, 2023 @10:25PM (#35934807)
No, because the program has to be run by slurm over several compute nodes, so it can't process them all at once.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Julia 1.9.0 lives up to its promise by adgjlsfhk1 on Saturday May 13, 2023 @10:58PM (#35934950)
as long as you don't have 50k computers, it still should be 0.85 seconds per node which is still tiny.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Julia 1.9.0 lives up to its promise by shakow on Sunday May 14, 2023 @05:22AM (#35936606)
> it still should be 0.85 seconds per node

No it's not, because I will not architecture my whole pipeline & program around Julia inability to start in a second, I will just use another language.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Julia 1.9.0 lives up to its promise by pjmlp on Sunday May 14, 2023 @07:53AM (#35937303)
In good company, that is what Python folks do all the time.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Julia 1.9.0 lives up to its promise by shakow on Sunday May 14, 2023 @09:28AM (#35937784)
Python does not take 1.7" to load pandas.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Julia 1.9.0 lives up to its promise by pjmlp on Sunday May 14, 2023 @11:38AM (#35938779)
> I will just use another language.

Hello C, C++ and Fortran.

[ Parent | on HN ]