TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Why We Use Julia, 10 Years Later

325 点作者 KenoFischer超过 3 年前

27 条评论

wiz21c超过 3 年前
I&#x27;m currently writing code with it. The language is really (really) nice to work with.<p>- But the REPL lacks the ability to redefine structs on the go (which I can understand as it&#x27;d be tough to do, or simply not possible). But that, combined with the slow start up time makes life a bit harder than it should. Fortunately, one doesn&#x27;t redefine its structs every day.<p>- There are also lots of libraries but the quality of the documentation is often sub par. For a newcomer like me, working examples would be great. For example, if you use the plots library, you&#x27;ll have hard time finding a list of all possible plots (the documentation talks about lots of things, but strangely, not a list of possible charts). I&#x27;ve also looked at doing linear regression and GLM and, again, you&#x27;ve code libraries but the examples are rare...<p>- the startup time are still quite slow but that&#x27;s ok because somehow you adapt your workflow around.<p>- being able to use greek symbols as identifiers is super cool but your editor as to manage that, else you&#x27;ll have to memorize shortcuts...<p>But still, I keep on using it, it&#x27;s much faster for my use case (data processing). I mean, faster than r or Python (for which I could write fast code but that&#x27;d mean I&#x27;d have to change the way it is written)
评论 #30341243 未加载
评论 #30340007 未加载
评论 #30342030 未加载
评论 #30338606 未加载
评论 #30344032 未加载
评论 #30339788 未加载
评论 #30338718 未加载
评论 #30339174 未加载
评论 #30341806 未加载
socialdemocrat超过 3 年前
I cannot remember exactly when I discovered Julia or where. But I remember I got intrigued early on and wrote a blogpost about 9 years ago on Tumblr, which is still there comparing Julia to Ruby of all things: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;assoc.tumblr.com&#x2F;post&#x2F;70484963303&#x2F;getting-comfortable-with-the-julia-programming-language" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;assoc.tumblr.com&#x2F;post&#x2F;70484963303&#x2F;getting-comfortabl...</a><p>The normal thing today is comparing Julia to R, Matlab and Python. But my intro to Julia was actually trying to convert code examples in the O&#x27;Reilly book: &quot;Exploring Everyday Things with R and Ruby: Learning About Everyday Things&quot; to Julia.<p>I thought that worked quite nicely and that the Julia code looked a lot nicer than the Ruby code. It made me write a follow up blog post a few days later: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;assoc.tumblr.com&#x2F;post&#x2F;71454527084&#x2F;cool-things-you-can-do-in-julia" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;assoc.tumblr.com&#x2F;post&#x2F;71454527084&#x2F;cool-things-you-ca...</a><p>Unlike your typical Julia user I was always into programming because I wanted to make computer games. I liked playing with Game engine architectures and those exposed me to the problem of handling collision between objects of different types. Multiple-dispatch solves that problem very elegantly. Traditional object-oriented languages are pretty bad at it.<p>From the perspective of writing clean and expressive code, this really won me over to Julia early on before I had done much serious work with it.<p>It became my goto language for writing Unix tools, replacing Go, Ruby and Python.
评论 #30338755 未加载
评论 #30344196 未加载
评论 #30341045 未加载
eigenspace超过 3 年前
I started using Julia in 2017, and as a physics student who saw Python, Mathematica, and Matlab as a series of tools that I had to pull out sometimes to solve specific problems, it came as a great shock to me that I was suddenly interested in Julia for it&#x27;s own sake.<p>It&#x27;s not an overstatement to say that this language totally changed my relationship with computers and programming.
评论 #30340767 未加载
KenoFischer超过 3 年前
For those who like to reminisce, here is the HN discussion from 10 years ago: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=3606380" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=3606380</a>
komuher超过 3 年前
I can reflect on like past few years (like 1.5 year ago i was disappointed by julia lack of progres but a lot have changed).<p>Julia is getting usable even in &quot;normal&quot; applications not only academic stuff, as person who come back after 1.5&#x2F;2 years to julia i feel like i can use it again in my job cause it is a lot more stable at have a lot of new neat futures + CUDA.jl is amazing.<p>I hope Julia team will still explore a bit more static type inference and full AOT compilation if language got full support for AOT it&#x27;ll be a perfect deal for me :).
评论 #30339532 未加载
memming超过 3 年前
I recently made some time to come back to Julia and it&#x27;s been wonderful. Unlike the early frustrating days when major version updates broke so many things, the core is solid and the ecosystem is wonderful. I am so happy learning and programming that I have to stop myself from spending too much time messing with it. Kudos to the Julia developers!
cube2222超过 3 年前
I&#x27;ve been working through the Statistical Rethinking[0] course with Julia recently and so far the language has been really intuitive, same for the libraries (Turing, Distributions). And it&#x27;s nice that you don&#x27;t have to vectorize your code and can use normal for-loops.<p>Also, the way dynamic dispatch + specialization work is beautiful.<p>[0]:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;rmcelreath&#x2F;stat_rethinking_2022" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;rmcelreath&#x2F;stat_rethinking_2022</a>
pbohun超过 3 年前
Julia is a very pleasant language to work with. The type system, multiple dispatch, and package system all make it into top 10 of design.<p>The only change I would recommend is to have a way to distinguish between creating and setting a variable. Without this distinction it is very easy (especially for someone with dyslexia) to misspell a variable and accidentally create a new one instead of assigning a value. Something like this would be nice:<p>var x = 5<p>or even something like Go:<p>x := 5
评论 #30344072 未加载
评论 #30343814 未加载
评论 #30358887 未加载
visviva超过 3 年前
I started playing with Julia in 2013, after searching for a Matlab replacement that was (according to my notes at the time) &quot;... open (or more open than Matlab), fast, parallelizable, with good scientific&#x2F;math libraries.&quot; My intent was to write a reusable and extensible library to enable my day to day work (astrodynamics and estimation). Two years later I had implemented enough tools and gained enough proficiency with it that I switched entirely away from using Matlab at all (even for smaller data analysis tasks), and I haven&#x27;t looked back.<p>It has made me objectively better at my job, and a much better programmer overall.
评论 #30341349 未加载
stellalo超过 3 年前
I first learned about Julia somewhere in 2013, I thought “damn, this looks really nice”, but never used it seriously until 2016 (v0.4). This language gives me joy, I never get tired of it.
plafl大约 3 年前
Julia, because fast can be beautiful. I don&#x27;t know how much it&#x27;s going to grow but it doesn&#x27;t look like stalling in the near future. The reason is simple: it fulfills a need no other language does.<p>I would guess there are some possibilities that could be a menace:<p>1. Someone manages to convince scientists to use a statically typed language.<p>2. Computing paradigm changes drastically. Everyone moves to quantum computing or similar.<p>3. In another 10 years someone learns from the lessons of Julia and improves on them to make a much better language.
评论 #30346085 未加载
评论 #30359355 未加载
urthor超过 3 年前
I count myself as someone surprised at Julia&#x27;s success.<p>As a replacement for Python, I&#x27;ve never understood the appeal, and it&#x27;s probably not going to fill that niche. Still, as a replacement for Matlab&#x2F;Mathematica, it&#x27;s doing swimmingly.<p>All the best.
评论 #30341697 未加载
评论 #30341063 未加载
dexterlagan大约 3 年前
I really, really wanted to like Julia. The syntax looked perfect to me (coming from scheme), and somehow everything felt &#x27;right&#x27;. That&#x27;s when I discovered that compiling to binary seemed to be frowned upon. I found some documentation on how to do this back when 1.0 came out, but it looked unnecessarily complicated and &#x27;third-party&#x27;. I&#x27;m guessing Julia really is for sci-comp and data scientists, and not for producing redistributable bins. Does anybody know if Julia will ever become more &#x27;general purpose&#x27;, like say Racket or Python? Thank you.
评论 #30344418 未加载
评论 #30346129 未加载
appleiigs超过 3 年前
I&#x27;m hoping Julia gets its killer app that can launch it to the next level like Rails or Numpy. Julia has a lot of pleasantries, but not enough to pry me away from what I&#x27;m productive with. There&#x27;s certain amount of switching cost that needs to be overcome.
评论 #30344165 未加载
评论 #30346202 未加载
评论 #30339546 未加载
评论 #30344680 未加载
blindseer超过 3 年前
I didn&#x27;t read every testimonial but I read a lot, and I have to say a lot of it resonated with me and reminded me of when I first came across Julia. Congrats on the 10 year journey, and I hope for more great progress in the future.
streamofdigits大约 3 年前
I get a sense that the julia community is more anxious about adoption than, e.g. python or R communities. Its probably natural given it is a relative newcomer in the broader &quot;data science&quot; &#x2F; &quot;scientific computing&quot; thing and in the past years there was an explosion of interest &#x2F; hype around some of its subsets (in particular anything that can be labelled machine learning or AI)<p>But participating in that &quot;hype&quot; is not necessarily what will entrench julia for the long term. Turning its unique characteristics (unique versus these other two open source contestants, not across the entire programming language landscape) into unmissable developer &#x2F; user experiences seems to me a safer route. E.g what makes R impossible to ignore is the richness of its statistical toolkit. What makes python impossible to ignore is the productivity boost for typical tasks etc.
wodenokoto大约 3 年前
I thought Chris Rackauckas was particularly good. I think he ends with a good summary of one of the many reasons solving the dual language problem is important:<p>&gt; There are so many places in math that are simply untouched because they sound like the domain of a compilers instead of &quot;computational science&quot;, and I&#x27;m excited to see how the next 10 years bridges this gap in Julia.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.julialang.org&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2022&#x2F;02&#x2F;10years&#x2F;#chris_rackauckas_a_hrefhttpsgithubcomchrisrackauckaschrisrackauckas" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.julialang.org&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2022&#x2F;02&#x2F;10years&#x2F;#chris_rackau...</a>
lmc大约 3 年前
Jose Storopoli (@storopoli): &quot;I&#x27;ve made amazing friendships here, co-authored a free open access and open source Julia Data Science book with Rik Huijzer and Lazaro Alonso.&quot;<p>I just read this book. Every page was like, &#x27;wow&#x27;.<p>A couple of questions I had afterwards:<p>* I saw the DateTime type, but it doesn&#x27;t seem to have a timezone - how do you deal with timezones?<p>* How is it to work with async code?<p>* It&#x27;s a garbage collected language, what are some techniques to avoid performance pitfalls due to that?<p>If there&#x27;s other Julia programmers around, any answers would be much appreciated!
评论 #30344954 未加载
tkuraku超过 3 年前
I really like julia. For certain problems matlab and python are unworkable. People complain about time to first plot, but that doesn&#x27;t matter too much to me. The problem is that plotting in general is just not as robust or user friendly as Matlab or matplotlib in python. You can call matplotlib, But it feels like a second class citizen. Plotting just needs to be better with a clear preferred method. There are tons of options.
评论 #30345594 未加载
评论 #30342308 未加载
评论 #30341769 未加载
RyEgswuCsn超过 3 年前
I just noticed that someone finally fixed that stretched minesweeper screenshot on Julia&#x27;s landing page.
评论 #30340589 未加载
lenkite大约 3 年前
An opposing viewpoint on the issues of Julia from a user of Julia: &quot;What&#x27;s bad about Julia?&quot; <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;viralinstruction.com&#x2F;posts&#x2F;badjulia&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;viralinstruction.com&#x2F;posts&#x2F;badjulia&#x2F;</a>
评论 #30344277 未加载
lenkite超过 3 年前
Good for exploratory programming but trying to make a single binary for any re-distributable app is a nightmare. PackageCompiler will always beat you up. And frankly, why can&#x27;t Julia have a simple, single CLI command to create a binary like any other PL.
评论 #30350494 未加载
评论 #30343156 未加载
xiaodai超过 3 年前
I still have a couple of pain points<p>* TTFP - this is the big one. Every thing is a sluggish sometimes * Sluggish IDE in VSCode; I am on Windows so start up is a bit of a pain i often have to wait 20+ s for it to become responsive * Non-robust Basic Data Science coverage e.g. GLM fails on some datasets that R can handle. So it&#x27;s the only code in my workflow that still has R in it
rnikander超过 3 年前
There is something elegant about having all functions at the top level (or module) scope, `foo(x, y, z)`, but I there is also something really nice about function names scoped to the thing&#x2F;noun&#x2F;subject: `x.foo(a, b)`. As far as I know Julia only does the former. Sometimes the latter seems a lot easier to deal with.
评论 #30340581 未加载
评论 #30340251 未加载
AitchEmArsey大约 3 年前
Make the package management more Cargo-like and I&#x27;d probably adopt it wholesale; whenever I&#x27;ve tried Julia in the past the user experience of just getting started has been the off-putting part.
评论 #30344173 未加载
评论 #30350289 未加载
antifarben大约 3 年前
I wish CrystalLang would gain some popularity and thus traction. It seems to be a good alternative between high level syntax and performance.
pella超过 3 年前
&quot;14 February 2012&quot; is a birthday?
评论 #30338112 未加载