[julia-users] Re: Dan Luu's critique of Julia: needs commented code, better testing, error handling, and bugs fixed.
+1 to addering to the git flow, I had also allways expected for the master branch to be as stable and possible, while development happening in another branch, not the other way around and sometimes I've had to search for a past working commit in order to build julia, which strikes me as odd, as you guys really follow good development techniques. Would it be difficult to change this, maybe for a post 0.4 era? El lunes, 29 de diciembre de 2014 10:36:19 UTC-6, Christian Peel escribió: Dan Luu has a critique of Julia up at http://danluu.com/julialang/ (reddit thread at http://bit.ly/1wwgnks) Is the language feature-complete enough that there could be an entire point release that targeted some of the less-flashy things he mentioned? I.e. commented code, better testing, error handling, and just fixing bugs? If it's not there, is there any thoughts on when it would be?
[julia-users] Re: Dan Luu's critique of Julia: needs commented code, better testing, error handling, and bugs fixed.
On Thursday, January 1, 2015 9:55:11 AM UTC+10, Ismael VC wrote: +1 to addering to the git flow, I had also allways expected for the master branch to be as stable and possible, while development happening in another branch, not the other way around and sometimes I've had to search for a past working commit in order to build julia, which strikes me as odd, as you guys really follow good development techniques. Well, using master as the development branch is the Linux Kernal workflow, so I doubt you can call it unusual. It is also the approach mostly used in the git book chapter http://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Distributed-Git-Distributed-Workflows. Really experimental things are in feature branches which will eventually be merged into master. Stable is the release 0.3 branch. When the first 0.4 RCs are made, a branch will be made for 0.4. Cheers Lex PS thats as I understand the workflow as an outside observer, so consider this the test to see how understandable Julia's workflow is. Would it be difficult to change this, maybe for a post 0.4 era? El lunes, 29 de diciembre de 2014 10:36:19 UTC-6, Christian Peel escribió: Dan Luu has a critique of Julia up at http://danluu.com/julialang/ (reddit thread at http://bit.ly/1wwgnks) Is the language feature-complete enough that there could be an entire point release that targeted some of the less-flashy things he mentioned? I.e. commented code, better testing, error handling, and just fixing bugs? If it's not there, is there any thoughts on when it would be?
Re: [julia-users] Re: Dan Luu's critique of Julia: needs commented code, better testing, error handling, and bugs fixed.
I didn't know that fact about the Linux kernel, or how usual it is, I've just red the git book and it explains it like this: http://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Branching-Branching-Workflows On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 7:30 PM, ele...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, January 1, 2015 9:55:11 AM UTC+10, Ismael VC wrote: +1 to addering to the git flow, I had also allways expected for the master branch to be as stable and possible, while development happening in another branch, not the other way around and sometimes I've had to search for a past working commit in order to build julia, which strikes me as odd, as you guys really follow good development techniques. Well, using master as the development branch is the Linux Kernal workflow, so I doubt you can call it unusual. It is also the approach mostly used in the git book chapter http://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Distributed-Git-Distributed-Workflows. Really experimental things are in feature branches which will eventually be merged into master. Stable is the release 0.3 branch. When the first 0.4 RCs are made, a branch will be made for 0.4. Cheers Lex PS thats as I understand the workflow as an outside observer, so consider this the test to see how understandable Julia's workflow is. Would it be difficult to change this, maybe for a post 0.4 era? El lunes, 29 de diciembre de 2014 10:36:19 UTC-6, Christian Peel escribió: Dan Luu has a critique of Julia up at http://danluu.com/julialang/ (reddit thread at http://bit.ly/1wwgnks) Is the language feature-complete enough that there could be an entire point release that targeted some of the less-flashy things he mentioned? I.e. commented code, better testing, error handling, and just fixing bugs? If it's not there, is there any thoughts on when it would be?
Re: [julia-users] Re: Dan Luu's critique of Julia: needs commented code, better testing, error handling, and bugs fixed.
On Thursday, January 1, 2015 11:44:53 AM UTC+10, Ismael VC wrote: I didn't know that fact about the Linux kernel, or how usual it is, I've just red the git book and it explains it like this: http://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Branching-Branching-Workflows And just under that diagram it says: We will go into more detail about the various possible workflows for your Git project in Chapter 5 http://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/ch05/_distributed_git, so before you decide which branching scheme your next project will use, be sure to read that chapter. Chapter 5 is more on distributed projects such as Julia (and Linux :). Cheers Lex On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 7:30 PM, ele...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: On Thursday, January 1, 2015 9:55:11 AM UTC+10, Ismael VC wrote: +1 to addering to the git flow, I had also allways expected for the master branch to be as stable and possible, while development happening in another branch, not the other way around and sometimes I've had to search for a past working commit in order to build julia, which strikes me as odd, as you guys really follow good development techniques. Well, using master as the development branch is the Linux Kernal workflow, so I doubt you can call it unusual. It is also the approach mostly used in the git book chapter http://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Distributed-Git-Distributed-Workflows. Really experimental things are in feature branches which will eventually be merged into master. Stable is the release 0.3 branch. When the first 0.4 RCs are made, a branch will be made for 0.4. Cheers Lex PS thats as I understand the workflow as an outside observer, so consider this the test to see how understandable Julia's workflow is. Would it be difficult to change this, maybe for a post 0.4 era? El lunes, 29 de diciembre de 2014 10:36:19 UTC-6, Christian Peel escribió: Dan Luu has a critique of Julia up at http://danluu.com/julialang/ (reddit thread at http://bit.ly/1wwgnks) Is the language feature-complete enough that there could be an entire point release that targeted some of the less-flashy things he mentioned? I.e. commented code, better testing, error handling, and just fixing bugs? If it's not there, is there any thoughts on when it would be?
