(Making an attempt at going back somewhat on topic...) I think some of the frustration here is also that it's not entirely obvious even from the performance tips <http://docs.julialang.org/en/latest/manual/performance-tips/> that putting your code in a function will make such a huge difference. The mechanisms that are responsible for making it so are explained in detail in the very first section ("Avoid global variables") but I can understand why especially people new to Julia don't immediately associate this to putting code in a function when measuring performance. Perhaps renaming the section to "Avoid global variables, and put your code in functions" would help straighten some of these question marks out?
//T On Thursday, July 24, 2014 6:29:59 AM UTC+2, Tony Kelman wrote: > > Live editor/IDE integration of linting (and type-checking) a la Matlab > would be quite nice to have one of these days. Julia seems to self-select > for the type of people who actually listen to suggestions and are willing > to experiment with refactoring and profiling, but I still fear the piles of > awful Matlab code I've dealt with over the years with every single line > covered in orange underlines (I think we've all been there). Tough balance > to strike with "if you ignore these, your code will run slowly" in a way > that doesn't lead to new users just tuning out all advice. > > > On Wednesday, July 23, 2014 3:27:24 PM UTC-7, Stefan Karpinski wrote: >> >> My inclination is to include type checking and linting in base Julia, >> automatically invoked by a "paranoid" mode that also ignores inbounds >> annotations and such. Then the testing infrastructure should run tests in >> paranoid mode, linting and type checking the code to be tested. This seems >> like a good point to have that kind of check automatically since you're >> already asking for that kind of feedback. Since packages should always have >> tests, this will also serve to make sure that packages pass type check and >> lint inspection. >> >> On Jul 23, 2014, at 2:05 PM, Sam L <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > I'd be strongly in favor of that, but it would make Julia feel more >> like one of those static languages for which compilers readily warn you >> about your bad habits. >> >> Maybe Lint and TypeCheck should display their message with a >> `suggest("blah")` or `hint("blah")` that is printed in purple instead of a >> red warning. :) >> >> On Wednesday, July 23, 2014 12:39:11 PM UTC-7, Bradley Alpert wrote: >>> >>> I for one am thrilled to be able to program every day in such a >>> beautiful, flexible, clean language with generally good performance and in >>> which sparkling performance is possible. By comparison, performance >>> instability is a minor matter. >>> >>> There, I have thoroughly discredited myself by banal chatter! >>> >>>
