On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 7:51 AM, moritz braun <[email protected]> wrote:
> However the standard journals will probably tell me, that this language > is to "immature etc." > Do you have any specific reason to think they will do this? I've never heard of a journal saying anything about an author's choice of programming language. For the scientific record, Julia already has a higher level of reproducibility than commercial software. You can easily get a copy of the exact version of Julia that was used in any experiment. You cannot, on the other hand, get a copy of the specific version of Matlab that was used when a paper was published – you can only hope that MathWorks hasn't changed things in an incompatible way, which is not always the case.
