julia package).
I'm pretty sure this is a .deb package problem and not an issue with Julia
itself, so I'll tell the PPA maintainer.
On Sunday, November 16, 2014 10:21:01 PM UTC-5, Isaiah wrote:
>
> If this is not fixed now, please file an issue.
>
> On Thu, Nov 13, 20
The julianightlies PPA at some point moved the documentation into a
separate package, julia-doc, that seems to have a slight problem:
julia> help(help)
ERROR: could not open file /usr/share/doc/julia/helpdb.jl
in include at ./boot.jl:242
in include_from_node1 at ./loading.jl:128
in evalfile at
Success! Latest Ubuntu nightlies do have a sys.so file and the start up
time is down from 20ish seconds to 2 seconds!
On Wednesday, May 21, 2014 5:50:18 PM UTC-4, Omar Antolín Camarena wrote:
>
> I was excited to learn that Julia 0.3 will have a much smaller startup
> time than 0.2 d
ing done to
>> address the startup time for external packages.
>>
>> 3. Julia uses ~/.julia
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Omar Antolín Camarena
>> > wrote:
>> > I was excited to learn that Julia 0.3 will have a much smaller sta
t;> 2. You can write a base/userimg.jl file, which will be precompiled
>> along with the rest of base Julia. Gradual work is being done to
>> address the startup time for external packages.
>>
>> 3. Julia uses ~/.julia
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 5:50 P
Thanks for your response, James.
> 1. The newest 0.3 binaries are supposed to contain the sys.dylib file
> (it's sys.so on linux, and so I have started to just call it that
> everywhere for simplicity) and thereby gain the accelerated startup
> time. I'm not sure why this would be failing for
I was excited to learn that Julia 0.3 will have a much smaller startup time
than 0.2 does. If I understood correctly, the reason Julia was slow to
start is that it compiles a large portion of the standard library upon
starting and the fix was to precompile the library. I installed the Julia
0.3
