Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> “Julia can Jit code that relies on vastly improved versions of all those features (minus some setatr etc).”

This basically summarizes the problem with most Julia upvote party posts like this one on Hacker News. Your comment is totally one-sided, Julia is better at every possible thing, so much that you are noseblind to it and can’t get an outside perspective that no, in fact, Julia’s language features do not have some fully dominating feature by feature parity compared against Python.

Every time it’s just an agonizing dragged out comment thread full of this type of overly one-sided thinking. Usually I just ignore all Julia posts for exactly this reason, and probably should have this time too, but seeing Python jit options and Cython options misrepresented so badly just got the better of me.




You are using now denigrating comments instead of answering simple questions. You are not even explaining what is wrong with the quote you took from the previous comment. The poster never said "Julia is better at every possible thing", but you are totally saying that about python by pretending it is not a chore and a difficult learned skill to write fast python numerics.

Yes, we all know that if you program in a very particular way (basically by not using any of the great dynamic or introspective features) you get fast python. How is it not objectively better to have a language that is fast independently of whether you use its dynamic/introspective/metaprogramming features?

"Python is fast as long as I program in this very particular and very constrained way" is a silly way to defend python (which is nonetheless an amazing language).

Julia has a ton of "zero cost abstractions". Python, as great as it is, simply does not.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: