[danysdragons]

The article argues that while the language is way cool in principle, the current implementation is bug-ridden and has poor error-handling. But as the HN title acknowledges, the article was written in 2014, when the Julia version was only 0.4. Since then it's been four years, and Julia only recently hit 1.0. It would be much more interesting to see an article discussing the current state of the language.

[eigenspace]

I've been using Julia seriously for the last year and I'm absolutely loving it. The language is beatiful, elegant and fast and the community has been nothing but friendly, helpful and welcoming to me.

I think its a real shame this out of date grievance article is being dredged up again giving people a myopic view of what Julia 0.4 may have been like in 2014 when its now 2018 and we have v1.0.

[jjoonathan]

I used Julia for my thesis work in 2015 and also came away with "nice, but dealbreaking bugs, two in particular." They were both fixed by 2016. Julia is moving way too fast for a years-old opinion to mean much.

[ChrisRackauckas]

Most people using Julia today weren't using Julia in 2014 because we didn't think it was ready. That should tell you how relevant Julia v0.4 is to modern Julia.