Can Julia dethorone Python?

Attached: 1024px-Julia_prog_language.svg.png (1024x692, 37K)

Other urls found in this thread:

archive.is/mnbNo
graydon2.dreamwidth.org/189377.html
github.com/robert-strandh/Second-Climacs
stochasticlifestyle.com/zero-cost-abstractions-in-julia-indexing-vectors-by-name-with-labelledarrays/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

hell no

should it?

I mean look. it has some nice features. it's better than python in some ways. but the fact is languages like this pop up every couple of years and they never do much more than sit on the sidelines. a few years from now there will be another new sexy language.

yeah it would be awesome, but it will take a great deal of time for julia to catch up with python in terms of community/libraries
I mean look, you should seriously consider suicide.

no, sorry kid, it will be Nim.

Attached: nim.jpg (900x506, 65K)

*fucks your bitch*

Attached: 4F5BFE37-3132-4E90-95A4-0348B5172FAB.png (1200x847, 15K)

but haskell is compiled
same with nim

im looking for an interpreted lang, a script

Doesn't serve the same purposes as python. It's a cool language though.

>dethorone
is this the /esl/ board

Yes in same way Satan can in theory dethrone God.

>another memelang of the month
Just use Lisp.

No language is "compiled" or "interpreted". It all boils down to the implementation.

I'll start learning it once you retards manage to make at least a regular text editor with it as proof of concept archive.is/mnbNo
Your language is garbage and your |337 L15p3r4t1 fuckwit community is even more garbage.

Current implementation sucks for short lived programs, so no.

Reminder that Julia is the real Lisp successor.
graydon2.dreamwidth.org/189377.html

Julia is a data-oriented language that is being replacing Python, R, Matlab in data science and STEM as its much easier to use and more productive than these languages. As it gets more adoption it will also be discovered for being a good systems administration scripting language to replace Perl and Python because of its powerful and low level I/O implementation. Julia will not catch on as a general purpose language for the same reason that Javascript will never catch on as a general purpose language, Javascript is very good at web frontend and backend but can't be used for anything outside the web. Also Julia lacks OO, which means a language like Dart is better suited for general purpose scripting.

>Julia is a data-oriented language that is being replacing Python, R, Matlab in data science and STEM as its much easier to use and more productive than these languages.
julia's use is literally declining. it's not replacing anything. python is growing in data science by insane amounts.

Python shouldn't have existed in the first place in the world where Smalltalk, Common Lisp, Scheme, Cedar all existed before it.

github.com/robert-strandh/Second-Climacs

Based

Julia and Python are good for normal science/math students and people who want to do math.

Haskell is only for those who have ascended.

Attached: Haskell.png (432x435, 97K)

>reposting a months old bait thread
The editor _was_ posted, yet that OP kept moving goalposts.

lol, that was addressed in second thread on the subject, Robert Strandh is a state paid unqualified professor who has been doing "research" on that for 20 years. It doesn't compile or work, and most commits are latex edits for his eternal paper on text editors in lisp and refactors.

No it wasn't and never will be because lisp community is retarded.

Attached: iori.jpg (791x720, 81K)

Did you even read the second thread? A full-blown GUI editor in Racket was posted right at the beginning.
But you can keep crying and once again move the goalposts if that makes you feel better.

And it was made in a way that broke first request which was it needs to be redistributable binary anyone can use, but lisping homos confused it with hurrr installing entire Racket to run thing is redist text editor binary. And Racket itself wasn't fully lisp so there was that too. What a fucking bunch of losers.

>And it was made in a way that broke first request which was it needs to be redistributable binary anyone can use
And you can do this. The guy gave instructions on how to do it.
It ends up being large because, to make a standalone binary, it gets statically linked by default in most implementations. Many other language imolementations, such as Haskell's GHC, do this as well. Since their libraries and implementations are not as ubiquitous as C or C++, the only way to be sure your standalone binary will be portable is statically linking everything.
By their nature, Lisp languages require a highly capable runtime environment to run on most machines nowadays, due to the inherent fundamental differences between them and Lisp semantics. That's why "standalone binaries" are large.
C binaries however would still be pretty large if statically linked as well (although not as much), don't delude yourself. It's just that, being so widespread, most implementations dynamically link by defualt, producing a small binary that works wherever the standard C library (and other required third party libraries) are needed.
After all these months, you still haven't learned such basic things about programming language implementation, therefore these old baits are really not worth discussing anymore.

>I'm not moving the goalposts!

haskell for those who dont work in production

Yeah, that's what I said.

Except it's not. Fuck off Guido.

ZERO COST ABSTRACTIONS
stochasticlifestyle.com/zero-cost-abstractions-in-julia-indexing-vectors-by-name-with-labelledarrays/

No. It's already not an ideal approach to those things, but it is way not pleb enough to replace Python.
Use Lily, Inko or Huginn, then, if you're that much into experimental crap. Otherwise, grow the fuck up and use C# or Java.