I think this [0] is worth reading before starting a project in julia (it's quite shocking). Does anyone know if anything has changed in julia's development process over the last year?<p>[0] <a href="http://danluu.com/julialang/" rel="nofollow">http://danluu.com/julialang/</a>
I personally find the syntax of the language and quality of the current implementation (speed!) excellent. However, it doesn't experience the marketing languages like Rust or Golang receive.<p>What I personally also find worrisome is the perception (at least for me) that Julia is confined to scientific computing whereas I find it should really be a general purpose language.
> <i>For example, the Julia community seems to have coined the term “type-stability” to describe a concept that static / compiled languages have historically enforced and dynamic / scripting languages have historically disregarded.</i><p>I was not aware that this was a Julia neologism. It seems like such an appropriate term for discussing how to make code make the most out of JIT-compilation.
Julia seems like an almost perfect MATLAB replacement. (for my personal preference, I would like a slightly more static/rigid language, but I understand why that's not the right choice for Julia's target users.) There is just one problem... I really, really wish they had dropped the 1-based indexing and <= upper bound on index ranges. It is so annoying.
> Julia Computing carried out this work under contract from the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory (JHU APL) for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to support its TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System) program.<p>It's great! Looks like a very interesting contract.