stefan_ml at behnel.de
Tue Apr 24 07:44:34 CEST 2012
Greg Ewing, 24.04.2012 00:32:
> Dag Sverre Seljebotn wrote:
>> I'm excited about Julia because it's basically what I'd *like* to program
>> in. My current mode of development for much stuff is Jinja2 or Tempita
>> used for generating C code; Julia would be a real step forward.
> It looks interesting, but I have a few reservations about
> it as it stands:
> * No modules, just one big global namespace. This makes it
> unsuitable for large projects, IMO.
> * Multiple dispatch... I have mixed feelings about it. When
> methods belong to classes, the class serves as a namespace,
> and as we all know, namespaces are a honking great idea.
> Putting methods outside of classes throws away one kind of
> * One-based indexing? Yuck. I suppose it's what Fortran and
> Matlab users are familiar with, but it's not the best
> technical decision, IMO.
> On the plus side, it does seem to have a very nice and
> unobtrusive type system.
I totally agree. They might have been inspired by Lua and tried to make the
type system more usable. There are/were many languages that started off
with the design goal of being simple, beautiful and avoiding "all that
overhead", before they got to the point of becoming usable and consequently
Even if Julia stays a niche language (and there is nothing that indicates
that it won't be so), I think Dag is right in that it is an interesting
niche for a certain user group (whether that is enough for it to prevail,
well...). It could certainly make a nice addition to CPython.
Whether reimplementing Python in it is a good idea and worth the effort -
well, there are lots of incomplete special-purpose Python-like language
implementations already, so why not have one more.
More information about the cython-devel