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。

Julia and JuliaHub: Advancing Innovation and Growth

141 点作者 xgdgsc3 个月前

13 条评论

jarbus3 个月前
I&#x27;ve used, and am still using, Julia for my PhD research. It&#x27;s perfect for parallel&#x2F;distributed computing, and the neural network primitives are more than enough for my purposes. Anything I write in pure julia runs really, really fast, and has great profiling tools to improve performance further.<p>Julia also integrates with python, with stuff like PythonCall.jl. I&#x27;ve gotten everything to work so far, but it hasn&#x27;t been smooth. The python code is always the major bottleneck though, so I try to avoid it.<p>Overall, julia is a significantly better language in every single aspect except for ecosystem and the occassional environment issue, which you&#x27;ll get with conda often anyways. It&#x27;s really a shame that practically nobody actually cares about it compared to python. It supports multi-dimensional arrays as a first-class citizen, which means that each package doesn&#x27;t have it&#x27;s own array like torch, numpy, etc, and you don&#x27;t have to constantly convert between the types.
评论 #42949542 未加载
评论 #42952459 未加载
评论 #42957336 未加载
评论 #42949933 未加载
tmvphil3 个月前
As someone working with it day to day, coming from around 18 years of mostly python, I wish I could say my experience has been great. I find myself constantly battling with the JIT and compilation and recompilation and waiting around all the time (sometimes 10 to 15 minutes for some large projects). Widespread macro usage makes stack traces much harder to read. Lack of formal interfaces means a lot of static checking is not practical. Pkg.jl is also not great, version compatibility is kind of tacked on and has odd behavior.<p>Obviously there are real bright spots too, with speed, multiple dispatch, a relatively flourishing ecosystem, but overall I wouldn&#x27;t pick it up for something new if given the choice. I&#x27;d use Jax or C++ extensions for performance and settle on python for high level, despite its obvious warts.
评论 #42953093 未加载
评论 #42963168 未加载
jakobnissen3 个月前
It would be much more useful to see metrics that aren&#x27;t cumulative if we&#x27;re interested in growth. Cumulative measurements, by definition, will never decrease, even if Julia were to fall in popularity.
评论 #42947989 未加载
cbruns3 个月前
I am a MATLAB and Python user who has flirted with julia as a replacement. I don&#x27;t love the business model of JuliaHub, which feels very similar to Mathworks in that all the cool toolboxes are gated behind a &#x27;contact sales&#x27; or high priced license. The free 20 hours of cloud usage is a non-starter. Also it seems that by default, all JuliaHub usage is default cloud-based? on-prem and airgapped (something I need) is implied to be $$$.<p>Open sourcing and maintaining some components of things like JuliaSim or JuliaSim Control might expand adoption of Julia for people like me. I will never be able to convince my company to pay for JuliaHub if their pricing is similar to Mathworks.
评论 #42959122 未加载
Kalanos3 个月前
With some serious repositioning, I think there is still an opportunity for Julia to displace Python tools like polars&#x2F;pandas&#x2F;numpy, airflow, and pytorch -- with a unified ecosystem that makes it easy to transition to GPU and lead a differentiable programming revolution. They have the brain power to do it.<p>The future of Python&#x27;s main open source data science ecosystem, numfocus, does not seem bright. Despite performance improvements, Python will always be a glue language. Python succeeds because the language and its tools are *<i>EASY TO USE*</i>. It has nothing to do with computer science sophistication or academic prowess - it humbly gets the job done and responds to feedback.<p>In comparison to mojo&#x2F;max&#x2F;modular, the julia community doesn&#x27;t seem to be concerned with capturing share from python or picking off its use cases. That&#x27;s the real problem. There is room for more than one winner here. However, have the people that wanted to give julia a shot already done so? I hope not because there is so much richness to their community under the hood.
评论 #42953047 未加载
评论 #42953723 未加载
culebron213 个月前
My experience with Julia was good, and the language is convenient, however two major factors made me not use it after test projects:<p>1. Very scarce packages ecosystem. Like there&#x27;s dataframes.jl file with poor mans implementation of Pandas.<p>2. Recompiling everything every time. It meant that a Julia program in some script would take ~40 seconds compiling with dataframes &amp; some other important packages.<p>I think if a language is to replace Python in science, it would need to either be very fast (recompilation on every run breaks this, and running Julia in a notebook&#x2F;shell is interesting, but outside of pure scientific code, it should be easier to re-run it), or it should offer ergonomics. Pandas has very rough corners, especially when you need grouping with nontrivial operations, or grouped window functions. Joins aren&#x27;t easy either. Any system that makes this more ergonomic, could bite a bit off Python. But I don&#x27;t see such.
评论 #42963999 未加载
评论 #42962376 未加载
评论 #42963217 未加载
NeutralForest3 个月前
I like the language but I can&#x27;t help but feel it missed the train and that the ergonomics improvements it offers are too small to switch over from Python.
评论 #42950211 未加载
评论 #42947893 未加载
joshlk3 个月前
According to Stackoverflow trends, Julia’s popularity is decreasing and very small<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;trends.stackoverflow.co&#x2F;?tags=julia" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;trends.stackoverflow.co&#x2F;?tags=julia</a>
评论 #42948853 未加载
评论 #42948705 未加载
评论 #42952245 未加载
评论 #42948644 未加载
评论 #42955184 未加载
pjmlp3 个月前
I love to see Julia growth, if nothing else by being another Dylan like take on Lisp ideas, with a JIT compiler in the box, and the community keeping the effort to overcome tooling issues despite critics.
评论 #42948390 未加载
6gvONxR4sf7o3 个月前
I do scientific computing and a lisp was one of my first languages, so i feel like i ought to be the target audience, but it just never quite catches me.<p>It’s almost statically compilable which has almost gotten me to pick it up a few times, but apparently it still can’t compile a lot of the most important ecosystem packages yet.<p>The metaprogramming has almost gotten me to pick it up a few times, but apparently there aren’t mature static anti-footgun tools, even to the degree of mypy’s pseudo-static analysis, so I wouldn’t really want to use those in prod or even complex toy stuff.<p>It’s so damned interesting though. I hope it gets some of this eventually.
toolslive3 个月前
We do statistical modeling in Python in our company. When a statistician asked for R, I said &quot;no, but you can have Julia&quot;. He&#x27;s quite happy with it, and we&#x27;re planning to move some stuff over.
kayson3 个月前
I&#x27;m curious how people feel about the JIT compilation time vs runtime tradeoff these days. Any good recent benchmarks?
评论 #42951961 未加载
ofrzeta3 个月前
Somehow Julia is lacking the &quot;killer app&quot; like Ruby has with Rails.