Currently, your best bet would be using ODBC. https://github.com/karbarcca/ODBC.jl.
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Tejinder Singh <[email protected]>wrote: > I would love to see Julia to work in web development. Its a great > combination of easy of code (python) and speed (C). Is there a way to > interact with database like postgresql? So that i could try to create basic > CRUD app in julia? Thanks. > > > On Wednesday, 19 February 2014 01:11:37 UTC+5:30, Stefan Karpinski wrote: > >> Julia is definitely a general purpose language - but one that has been >> carefully designed to be expressive and efficient enough to be really >> excellent for technical computing. This is a surprisingly hard problem, as >> evidenced by the large portion of the core specification and code for many >> languages that consists of special cases for numbers and arithmetic. This >> is true even for "simple" languages like C and Scheme (numerics account for >> about 20% of the specification of each). As to the focus on technical >> computing, I think it's better to solve one major problem really well >> rather than trying to solve all problems at once. Computer science is doing >> pretty well at general computing these days, whereas technical computing - >> especially at scale - is still a significant challenge area where new >> technologies and approaches really stand to improve things. >> >> Domain-specific languages (DSLs) are in vogue these days, but personally >> I believe that we need a few very powerful, general-purpose languages, not >> a lot of weak, special-purpose ones. I suspect that what drives the DSL >> school of thought is the idea that we've already pushed linguistic >> expressiveness and power as far as it can go and it hasn't solved our >> problems. This appears to suggest that we need to go in the other direction >> and make more limited and specialized languages. But I believe, instead, >> that the premise that we've taken programming language expressiveness and >> power as far as it can go is incorrect. We need to be pushing linguistic >> power even further, rather than restricting it. >> >> The most obvious deficiencies in the expressiveness of typical languages >> lie in the area of numerical work. You can't, for example, define a new >> kind of integer in most languages and have it be both efficient and >> seamlessly integrated with the rest of the system. In other words, the >> built-in numerics are qualitatively superior to anything a user can define >> for themselves. One of the major driving goals behind Julia's design was >> that user-defined numerical types be just as good as the built-in ones. We >> took that to its logical conclusion and made Julia's built-in numeric types >> like Int and Float64 just user-defined types that happen to be defined >> before your program starts. >> >> To the extent that you can define your own efficient and completely >> integrated types for numerical work, Julia has already succeeded in pushing >> the power and expressiveness of general purpose languages further than it >> typically is. But technical computing in general still has so many >> challenging problems that need to be solved - many of which need more power >> from the underlying language. For example, we're only beginning to figure >> out all the language features that are necessary for doing array work >> really well. Making distributed technical computing really productive is >> also a huge unsolved problem. (This is a very different problem from >> writing highly concurrent servers, which Clojure and Go are doing a great >> job of tackling.) Until we've solved these and other problems in the >> technical computing domain, I think it's premature to lose our focus. >> >> It is great that people are writing excellent general purpose packages >> and applications in Julia, and that definitely needs to continue and >> increase with our blessing and support. But the core focus of the language >> has to continue to be on technical computing - until we can honestly say >> that technical computing is as much of a solved problem as string >> processing or writing desktop applications. That is still a long way off. >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 11:27 AM, Dave Bettin <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> If anybody is interested, I did find these two comments about Julia and >>> its part in the general purpose language world: >>> >>> 1. http://stackoverflow.com/a/17434967/632756 >>> 2. http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2014/02/julia/ >>> ?cid=co18025234#comment-1229330714 >>> >>> On Monday, February 17, 2014 10:22:38 AM UTC-8, Dave Bettin wrote: >>>> >>>> Julia is promoted as a technical computing language. However, there is >>>> this beautiful general purpose language waiting to be unleashed onto the >>>> masses. >>>> >>>> Why is this aspect of the language not communicated/marketed more? >>>> >>>> Additionally, is there currently anyone using Julia outside of the >>>> technical computing space? >>>> >>> >>
