[pjmlp]

Which is also meaningless if the eco-system doesn't grow as much as the competition.

D users put the language into a pedestal of language design, but that isn't what grows an eco-system, getting new users and libraries does.

I used to love the language, but so many mistakes have been made during the last 10 years, that it will hardly recover unless some company champions it, Swift/Kotlin style.

[tastyminerals2]

I agree. However, I wish more people valued solid foundations over tooling because no tooling is worth building on "good-enough" basis. If that ever was true we would have never had the situation when we desperately seek for alternatives and create numerous solutions each coming with its baggage of gotchas like "yeah, but you need to use this PackageCompiler library to make it faster".

So after reading the release notes about 6 sec. of start-up times and people keep complaining about warm-ups, I am smirking about how Julia is a dynamic language when compiling & executing a script written in a static language other than let's say Scala/Rust/C++ can be comparable or even faster in some situations.

[ddragon]

Being a dynamic language is not about start-up time, interpretation or compilation, but about types being a part of the value instead of the container (the variable definition). Julia is definitely dynamic.

The warm-up period is definitely an annoyance, but a surprisingly small one. Even if it takes one minute to compile all the libraries and code I'm working on, my programming session is usually much longer than a few minutes, so that warm-up becomes insignificant as I keep the program alive during all the development process and any new addition are pretty much instantaneously compiled (unlike static languages that have to be frequently recompiled, and it's faster even compared to incremental compilation in languages like Scala) and at the same time running faster after warm-up saves time over the session compared to interpreted language as well. Never bothered with PackageCompiler.

It's a matter of different workflows, and since Julia isn't the same as the usual dynamic languages or the usual compiled languages, it's easy to end up with suboptimal ones especially at the start (which I assume does hurt the image of the language as first impressions are key). That said I'd definitely want the ability of creating small static binaries for deployment or end users (even if they don't help during development, which I'm already more than satisfied).