Re: Julia was Re: Fortran was NOT higher level than C. Was: Computer architects leaving Intel...

Stephen Fuld <sfuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> schrieb:

On 9/5/2024 7:37 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote:
>

 
I prefer Julia for the more script-oriented stuff, it can be
quite fast.
 

>
When I first saw Julia some years ago, I was very impressed.  It
certainly has some nice features.  But apparently it hasn't caught on as
quickly as I had hoped. :-(

Can you talk about why you think it isn't more popular?

I can make guesses, but I'm not more informed than you.

Python's popularity, due to the sheer number of people using it,
is one reason.  People who know Python will continue using it
and see little reason to learn another language.  Many don't care
about Python's inefficiency when not using highly efficient compiled
code and, truth be told, for many applications it doesn't matter,
you have 3*10⁹ cycles to throw at it per second.
But when it does, it suddenly starts to bite people...

Also, Julia is simply less known than many other languages.

Julia is quite popular in some areas, which results in some
excellent packages.  Autodifferentiation plays a large role there,
which allows, for example, for excellent ODE solvers (a lot of
cutting-edge ODE research seems to be done in Julia).  If I needed
to solve lots of coupled ODEs and had my own choice of tools,
I would very probably use Julia.