https://github.com/Rory-Finnegan/Playground.jl ?
On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Adam R. Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > Steve: that’s a useful setup! > > Somebody was also making a Julia equivalent for python’s virtualenv, but I > can’t remember the name so I can’t find it now. Using aliases like yours, > you could associate a particular project with a particular julia version > with a virtualenv. I wish I could remember the name. > > a d a m > > On September 26, 2014 at 11:12:22 AM, Steve Kelly ([email protected]) > wrote: > > This is how I set up my environment to stay involved: > > julia -> master > julia3 -> release-0.3 > julia4on3-> use 0.4 packages on julia3 (this is helpful since I like to > develop in the v0.4 directory) > julia-multi -> run something with 0.4 packages on julia and julia3 (I > normally only use this with 'julia-multi ./test/runtests.jl') > > I've put the scripts I use for the last two on Github: > https://github.com/sjkelly/julia_scripts > > These four commands give me the satisfaction of seeing stuff break, and > also providing comfort when there are deadlines to meet :P. > > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Stefan Karpinski < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> It's a bit odd for there to be simultaneous complaints about 0.4 being >> unstable (ie under rapid development) and not going anywhere. It's been, >> what, 13 years since the plans to release Perl 6 were announced? Seems a >> bit early to worry about that kind of problem a couple of months after the >> last significant release of Julia. If 0.4 isn't out by 2020 we can start to >> worry. >> >> >> On Sep 26, 2014, at 10:12 AM, John Myles White <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Hans, >> >> The tone of your e-mail is a little odd in my opinion. It seems to imply >> distrust and even possibly anger for a project that would be substantially >> better served by participating actively in the issue discussions that Tim >> Holy discussed. I don't think anyone who's following 0.4's progress would >> ever believe that 0.4 is not on track. >> >> -- John >> >> On Sep 26, 2014, at 3:30 AM, Hans W Borchers <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Ivar, >> >> thanks for this clarification; I was really under the impression that -- >> like >> for Perl and other projects -- I might never ever again hear from a Julia >> 0.4 >> version. >> >> A question I asked got buried in another thread and never answered, so >> I'd like >> to repeat it here: >> >> Will the NEWS.md file immediately document the (disruptive or >> non-disruptive) >> changes? That would be very helpful, even if the change is withdrawn >> later on. >> Also, every NEWS entry could include a date to make it easier to follow >> the >> development. >> >> By the way, I am a bit worried about some of the names that seem to come >> up in a >> next version of Julia. For example, 'Nullable' or 'NullableArray' sound >> strange >> for me in a technical computing environment. >> >> >> On Friday, September 26, 2014 9:19:37 AM UTC+2, Ivar Nesje wrote: >>> >>> I think this is a too strong statement. There are definitely happening a >>> lot on the master (0.4-dev) branch, but it should be quite usable even >>> without reading the majority of Github issues. The more users we have, the >>> earlier concerns is raised, and the earlier we can fix them and prepare for >>> the final release. You should definitely avoid master on any project with a >>> deadline tough. >>> >>> >>> >> >
