[sdfgsdf]

> Note that the compile times of julia are not included in the benchmarks. If you read the website, you'd seen that the grapsh show the first (excluding the compilation) and the second run (with hot cache).

Here's my view: The author of that page has commented here on HN; If my claim was so outrageously wrong as you claim, he would've corrected it.

[fault1]

yeah, but your claim was "Note also that Julia would be number 1 in almost all of those benchmarks if you were to rank by speed of second run"

notice this isn't even a language vs language benchmark. it's libraries and frameworks.

plus I don't think even the author of the julia library in question would agree with your statement: https://discourse.julialang.org/t/the-state-of-dataframes-jl...

as mentioned in that thread, GC and strings, or especially a combination of the two, can be very much a downer in terms of julia performance. That's actually pretty surprising since strings are often as important if not more important than numbers for a lot of data processing needs.

I'd also say in terms of compilation time, some autocaching layer outside of precompilation would do wonders.