[nur0n]

To be fair, points 1,2, and 4 are regarding the ecosystem, not the language. There are definitely rough edges, but one can not expect a fully mature ecosystem only a few months after 1.0 has been released.

For a streamlined workflow, I recommend Emacs + Revise.jl. I just edit my code in an Emacs buffer, and the Revise automatically updates the REPL to reflect the source. This makes the code feel tangible, more than any other language I have experienced.

[mlevental]

>To be fair, points 1

juno is a product of the team

https://juliacomputing.com/products/juliapro.html

i'm assuming it's where they hope to make the bulk of the revenue from

[chrispeel]

There are many more people who work on the language than those who work at Julia Computing.

[nur0n]

JuliaComputing is not Julia the language

[mlevental]

you're being pedantic; i'm aware juliacomputing is not /the/ language. in fact it's an organization of people that maintain the language AND the juno ide.

what is the value proposition of julia? productivity of python with the speed of c (or some kind of tagline like this). a large part of the productivity of python is the fantastic set of tools around python. hence it's quite fair to judge julia proper on the polish of the tools that you need in order to be productive in julia.

[nur0n]

Apologies, I wasn't trying to be pedantic. My point is that Juno is decoupled from the language itself. You don't have do depend on it to be productive with Julia.

I agree that tooling has a significant influence on the productivity of a language. One does not only adopt a language, but the ecosystem and community around it. I think we both agree on this. I am simply trying to point out that there is an unavoidable delay between the maturity of the language and the maturity of the ecosystem. I think its fair to take this delay into account.