Le 7 janv. 2014 à 21:48, Erik Engheim a écrit : > Thanks for the nice comments all of you. I guess I have to keep writing more > about my Julia experiences after this ;-) > > On Tuesday, January 7, 2014 9:39:05 PM UTC+1, Ivar Nesje wrote: > Great post, it sums up very well the things I think is the strengths of Julia. > > A few notes: > Julia does not look up the method at runtime if the types of the arguments to > the function can be deduced from the types of the arguments to the > surrounding function (but it behaves that way for the user, unless he > redefines the method after the function was compiled #265). > > > That is cool I didn't know that. I assume this can make quite a big > difference in performance for tight inner loops.
Some misc comment too : > Julia is not object oriented Is that True ? From the manual : > It is multi-paradigm, combining features of imperative, functional, and > object-oriented programming. I consider that Julia can be OO, the code just look different than in other languages. Typo ? > Polymorphis lets you Missing m ? Liked the blog post too otherwise thanks, I would also have mentioned code_lowered, code_llvm and code_typed not everyone is fluent assembler and those tool are really useful to, especially in metaprogramming. -- M
