Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
m Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Talk:Julia (programming language)/Archive 2, Talk:Julia (programming language)/Archive 3) (bot |
||
| (47 intermediate revisions by 26 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|{{WikiProject Computer science |class=C |importance=low}}▼
{{WikiProject Computing |class=C |importance=Low}}▼
{{old AfD multi
|date1 = June 9 2012 |result1 = '''delete''' |page1 = Julia (programming language)
}}
{{WikiProject Computing |importance=high|software=y |software-importance=Top |science=y |science-importance=high}}
}}
{{refideas|1={{Cite web |last1=Phillips |first1=Lee |title=The unreasonable effectiveness of the Julia programming language |work=[[Ars Technica]] |date=2020-10-09 |url=https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/10/the-unreasonable-effectiveness-of-the-julia-programming-language/ |language=en-us |accessdate=2020-10-10 |df=mdy-all }}
|2=
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 31K
|counter =
|algo = old(365d)
|archive = Talk:Julia (programming language)/Archive %(counter)d
Line 25 ⟶ 29:
{{Reflist-talk}}
== Excessive detail/difficult readability ==
In my opinion, while the facts in this article are all fairly well-sourced, the article contains way too many esoteric details that are of little use to most people. These details are often in parentheses, sometimes nested parentheses, with "e.g." and "i.e.," and that in turn makes it hard to even follow the original text. This type of writing style is unlike most other articles I have encountered on this site. Take this paragraph in the introduction:
* "Several development tools support coding in Julia, such as [[Integrated development environment|integrated development environments]] (e.g. for Microsoft's [[Visual Studio Code]], an [[Plug-in (computing)|extension]] is available providing debugging and [[Lint (software)|linting]] support); with integrated tools, e.g. a [[Profiling (computer programming)|profiler]] (and flame graph support available for the built-in one), debugger, and the Rebugger.jl package "supports [[Interactive programming|repeated-execution debugging]]" and more."
All that this paragraph really needs to say is that there is linting and debugging support in IDEs for the language. Mentions of VS Code, the flame graph, and whatever Rebugger.jl is doing are details which should be in a section further down or omitted altogether save their citations. I am of the opinion that the entire paragraph should be removed from the intro because it does not concern the language itself, but rather third-party tools.
As far as I understand, Julia's support for compilation to binary executables is still experimental, and not really a core feature of the language - does it really deserve a paragraph in the intro?
As another example, take the list in the history section with the version numbers 1.1, 1.2, etc. Given that the 1.X is a stable version of the language, this seems like a list that could be cleaned up by simply mentioning the most important features that have been added since the 1.0 release, such as the multithreading from 1.3. Those sentences about 1.7+ being time-based releases or 1.7.3 shouldn't be there at all - aren't all patch releases "fixing some issues?" And who cares about time-based vs. feature-based? There are also multiple sentences in this section mentioning the details regarding performance improvements or things done to reduce compiler latency when it could really be boiled down to one or two sentences about how the developers have been focusing on the problem more generally.
Here's a draft of how I would write the history section, starting after the Bezanson quote and up to the sponsors subsection:
Julia 1.0 was released on 8 August 2018 with the syntax stabilized. Since then, the language has added many new features, such as composable multithreading in version 1.3, syntax for generic array indexing in 1.4, and an improved random number generator in 1.7. The releases have also gradually improved compiler latency and package loading times, i.e. the "time-to-first-plot" performance.
Three of the Julia co-creators are the recipients of the 2019 [[J. H. Wilkinson Prize for Numerical Software|James H. Wilkinson Prize for Numerical Software]] "for the creation of Julia, an innovative environment for the creation of high-performance tools that enable the analysis and solution of computational science problems." Alan Edelman received the 2019 IEEE Computer Society [[Sidney Fernbach Award]] "for outstanding breakthroughs in high-performance computing, linear algebra, and computational science and for contributions to the Julia programming language."
Since 2014, the Julia community has hosted an annual conference (JuliaCon) focused on developers and users. The conferences have taken place across a number of locations including MIT and the University of Maryland, Baltimore. JuliaCon was conducted virtually from 2020 to 2022 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The event audience has grown from a few dozen people to over 43,000 unique attendees during JuliaCon 2021. The conferences have featured keynote addresses from notable individuals such as [[William Kahan]] (the primary architect of the [[IEEE 754-1985|IEEE 754]] floating-point standard) and Soumith Chintala (co-creator of [[PyTorch]]).
It's much shorter, but it's also more readable and obviates the need for the reader to wade through the details of changes made to the language which could be easily accessed in their release notes. This would of course be a major edit, so let me know your thoughts. [[User:Eulalie880|Eulalie880]] ([[User talk:Eulalie880|talk]]) 21:36, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
:I'd be happy to see these edits merged! [[User:Closed Limelike Curves|Closed Limelike Curves]] ([[User talk:Closed Limelike Curves|talk]]) 03:00, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
:I agree the article doesn't really adhere to Wikipedia standards: a) often lacking independent sources, b) including content that is of questionable relevance, partially because it has not been mentioned in any independent sources, c) overly long, d) potentially overly positive, it doesn't list disadvantages/challenges of Julia. I could hardly find anything critical in the article, while there's plenty on the internet (yes potentially not super reliable sources [I haven't checked] but most of this article is just what Julia org says about Julia lang. Example criticism: https://www.reddit.com/r/Julia/comments/11ucqtz/whats_julias_biggest_weakness/, https://yuri.is/not-julia/, https://jamesmccaffrey.wordpress.com/2021/06/15/why-im-not-a-fan-of-the-julia-programming-language/ [[User:AncientWalrus|AncientWalrus]] ([[User talk:AncientWalrus|talk]]) 17:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
==
What it says. Sorry, but it does. [[Special:Contributions/2601:1C0:5401:2040:5CCB:C27C:F135:5733|2601:1C0:5401:2040:5CCB:C27C:F135:5733]] ([[User talk:2601:1C0:5401:2040:5CCB:C27C:F135:5733|talk]]) 04:12, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
:Yeah, I mostly just glanced at the article but the sentence "Julia programs can also be (separately) compiled to binary executables, even allowing no-source-code distribution, and the executables can get much smaller with Julia 1.12." stuck out to me. Do we really need to list that 1.12 can produce smaller executables? That reads more like an ad than something belonging in an encyclopedia. [[User:Kittybwained|Kittybwained]] ([[User talk:Kittybwained|talk]]) 00:52, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
::Currently compiled apps are huge, why 1.12 is mentioned, i.e. upcoming juliac tool in there, and its binaries are small. Yes, 1.12 isn't released yet as stable, but it is usable in beta form so I thought mentioning its capabilities was ok. Feel free to just change. [[User:Comp.arch|comp.arch]] ([[User talk:Comp.arch|talk]]) 14:09, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
== Where it can run table (compatibility) ==
It would be good to know on what platforms and version Julia can run on in a table, eg Windows, macOS, linux, iOS, Android, ... The table would probably need an explanation of any specific tools needed (frameworks, compilers). Also whether packaged packaged apps can be built that can be distributed (eg app store) to users without users requiring anything else to be installed.
An explanation of how features unique to each platform can be accessed would be useful. [[User:FreeFlow99|FreeFlow99]] ([[User talk:FreeFlow99|talk]]) 16:55, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
:FYI, there's no support tier for Android (or iOS), so everything for it is unofficial, and while possible to do, arguably non-ideal, at least currently. Julia can run on all the supported platforms, best if tier 1 support, all those desktop OSes you mention. No tools are needed except for Julia. But if you want precompiled, it's a more complex answer, and the (main) tools for that are mentioned in the article. Feel free to clarify the article or ask questions here. [[User:Comp.arch|comp.arch]] ([[User talk:Comp.arch|talk]]) 14:06, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
== Robust edits to address feedback ==
I'm looking to do fairly major rewrites of sections to address a number of the justified critiques on this talk page, with a focus on increasing readability, a balanced tone and inclusion of reliable independent sources. Happy to discuss here or on my talk page [[User:Jfo17]] [[User:Jfo17|Jfo17]] ([[User talk:Jfo17|talk]]) 04:31, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
| |||