"Tail call optimization" does make much more sense than "total cost if ownership". :-)
(Though I was wondering how much the devs care about the latter ... ;-) Cheers, Kevin On Thursday, December 11, 2014, Mike Innes <mike.j.in...@gmail.com> wrote: > https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/4964 > > On 11 December 2014 at 11:55, Uwe Fechner <uwe.fechner....@gmail.com > <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','uwe.fechner....@gmail.com');>> wrote: > >> What do you mean with TCO? >> >> On Thursday, December 11, 2014 10:50:19 AM UTC+1, Mike Innes wrote: >>> >>> It seems to me that a lot of FAQs could be answered by a simple list of >>> the communities'/core developers' priorities. For example: >>> >>> We care about module load times and static compilation, so that's going >>> to happen eventually. We care about package documentation, which is >>> basically done. We don't care as much about deterministic memory management >>> or TCO, so neither of those things are happening any time soon. >>> >>> It doesn't have to be a commitment to releases or dates, or even be >>> particularly detailed, to give a good sense of where Julia is headed from a >>> user perspective. >>> >>> Indeed, it's only the same things you end up posting on HN every time >>> someone complains that Gadfly is slow. >>> >>> On 11 December 2014 at 03:01, Tim Holy <tim....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Really nice summaries, John and Tony. >>>> >>>> On Thursday, December 11, 2014 02:08:54 AM Boylan, Ross wrote: >>>> > BTW, is 0.4 still in a "you don't want to go there" state for users of >>>> > julia? >>>> >>>> In short, yes---for most users I'd personally recommend sticking with >>>> 0.3. >>>> Unless you simply _must_ have some of its lovely new features. But be >>>> prepared >>>> to update your code basically every week or so to deal with changes. >>>> >>>> --Tim >>>> >>>> >>> >
