Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2015-05-10 Thread Scott Jones
I actually don't think it is really that hard... for the most part, Julia needs better performance and better compatibility in some areas, that haven't received as much attention as of yet... (strings, decimal floats, database access). None of these things will take anything away from what wha

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2015-05-10 Thread elextr
There is a very long list of interesting possibilities in this thread, but Julia does have a current target audience which it supports with a set of features that increase their utility. It is going to be tricky for those guiding Julia to ensure that things like more generality don't reduce the

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2015-05-10 Thread Scott Jones
On Thursday, December 4, 2014 at 5:24:18 PM UTC-5, Simon Danisch wrote: > > Actually, I opened this thread: > https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/julia-users/IjG2ERHVjz0 > when I needed to revisit prolog and first order logic for my AI exam... > I think Julia can be great for DSL

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2014-12-05 Thread Páll Haraldsson
On Friday, December 5, 2014 4:58:44 PM UTC, Mike Innes wrote: > > I suspect Tim's idea was to help out by closing issues, not by opening > them. > I guess :) I took a look and there were pages of issues (including the PhD one.. :) You seem to have succeeded in making an awesome language. I'm

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2014-12-05 Thread Mike Innes
I suspect Tim's idea was to help out by closing issues, not by opening them. On 5 December 2014 at 15:36, Páll Haraldsson wrote: > > > On Friday, December 5, 2014 2:39:11 PM UTC, Tim Holy wrote: >> >> I'm glad you're enthusiastic about Julia. If you're looking to pitch in, >> one >> good place t

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2014-12-05 Thread Páll Haraldsson
On Friday, December 5, 2014 2:39:11 PM UTC, Tim Holy wrote: > > I'm glad you're enthusiastic about Julia. If you're looking to pitch in, > one > good place to look is the list of open issues: > https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues > If you're most interested in "features," filtering on t

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2014-12-05 Thread Tamas Papp
On Fri, Dec 05 2014, Páll Haraldsson wrote: > Yes I did read it. Note, I meant would you still recommend (Common) Lisp > for anything, you seem to argue well for Julia (and against > "Lisp"/S-expressions while you're at it?). Note also, I said "would you Sure -- for example, if I wanted a lan

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2014-12-05 Thread Tim Holy
I'm glad you're enthusiastic about Julia. If you're looking to pitch in, one good place to look is the list of open issues: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues If you're most interested in "features," filtering on the "up for grabs" label might be a good start. Best, --Tim On Friday, Dece

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2014-12-05 Thread Páll Haraldsson
On Friday, December 5, 2014 11:34:46 AM UTC, Tamas Papp wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 05 2014, Páll Haraldsson > > wrote: > > > On Friday, December 5, 2014 8:54:26 AM UTC, Tamas Papp wrote: > >> > >> I find your aversion to femtolisp difficult to understand, probably > >> because I tend to think

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2014-12-05 Thread Tamas Papp
On Fri, Dec 05 2014, Páll Haraldsson wrote: > On Friday, December 5, 2014 8:54:26 AM UTC, Tamas Papp wrote: >> >> I find your aversion to femtolisp difficult to understand, probably >> because I tend to think of Julia as a Lisp with the following key >> features: >> > > I don't really have an

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2014-12-05 Thread Páll Haraldsson
On Friday, December 5, 2014 8:54:26 AM UTC, Tamas Papp wrote: > > I find your aversion to femtolisp difficult to understand, probably > because I tend to think of Julia as a Lisp with the following key > features: > I don't really have an aversion to femtolisp. I understand it's an awesome i

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2014-12-05 Thread Tamas Papp
I find your aversion to femtolisp difficult to understand, probably because I tend to think of Julia as a Lisp with the following key features: 1) a focus on being heavily optimizable, 2) infix/M-expression-like surface syntax. But given these two (very important) differences, I find Julia very,

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2014-12-04 Thread Simon Danisch
Actually, I opened this thread: https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/julia-users/IjG2ERHVjz0 when I needed to revisit prolog and first order logic for my AI exam... I think Julia can be great for DSLs! The current downside of Julia being very young and not having any established IDE

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2014-12-04 Thread Páll Haraldsson
On Thursday, December 4, 2014 7:21:21 PM UTC, Isaiah wrote: > > Please: consider the advice given on the issue tracker and try to ask a > small number of specific questions. Also, please search the issue tracker > and mailing list (e.g., the question about assembly language has been > discusse

Re: [julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2014-12-04 Thread Isaiah Norton
Please: consider the advice given on the issue tracker and try to ask a small number of specific questions. Also, please search the issue tracker and mailing list (e.g., the question about assembly language has been discussed several times). In general, asking questions like "what is the best lang

[julia-users] What is Julia bad for - currently? Practically (or theoretically) - any other language more "powerful"?

2014-12-04 Thread Páll Haraldsson
Hi, This is my first post here and since I've gotten your attention, my answer: Julia is (or seems to be) good at "everything".[*] But I'm just not sure.. [You could stop reading here.] I think Julia could be the last language people need to learn (and should be the first).[*] Maybe I'm being