[StefanKarpinski]

That's true, but it shouldn't segfault unless you do an out-of-bounds memory access, which this code isn't doing.

However, there seems to be a misunderstanding about how --compile=all (an experimental feature on the development branch of Julia) works. You can't run an impure operation like print during compilation. In the future, we may have a `julia-compile` command that translates a given Julia program into a binary equivalent, which seems to be what @fredmorcos expects, but that's not how the --compile=all flag works.

If you use Julia in the normal manner like you would Python, it's very reliable and stable. If you use experimental features and use them wrong, you can get segfaults. See these posts for more information about and some examples of using the Julia's experimental static compilation features:

http://juliacomputing.com/blog/2016/02/09/static-julia.html

http://juliacomputing.com/blog/2016/03/10/j2c-announcement.h...

[nickpsecurity]

That makes a lot of sense. Yeah, you should consider renaming it to something more clear. Maybe even change it into several commands with better names. Your docs frame the issue as whether it allows dynamic/JIT stuff or not. So, static-only, allow-dynamic, or allow-jit come to mind.

[StefanKarpinski]

> Maybe even change it into several commands with better names.

That's what I've been pushing for – I don't think it make sense to continue to have all these compilation-related flags baked into the interactive `julia` command.