Great to hear =) Well it's a rocky road, to be honest... But I think it'll pay off double in the end! I'm a little afraid of Julia's garbage collector, but besides that Julia seems to be very fit for high performance graphics.
2015-02-23 23:48 GMT+01:00 Samuel Colvin <[email protected]>: > I had no idea until today about your effort to use Julia for graphics. > It's really exciting. > > If graphics is becoming one of Julia's "core purposes" then work on > graphics at a low level isn't wasted. > > It sounds like on most of this we're actually agreeing. > > I'm as keen as anyone for JavaScript to be a stop gap before something > better, just that right now it's the best stop gap. > > > -- > > Samuel Colvin > [email protected], > 07801160713 > > On 23 February 2015 at 22:41, Simon Danisch <[email protected]> wrote: > >> *"To qualify what I mean by "easier", I guess I mean: "Easier in most >> cases for most developers", c and c++ are all very well, but the popularity >> and ease of development of JavaScript can't be argued with."* >> >> That's exactly why I hope that Julia will replace javascript, also for >> graphics. Like this we have both scientific and graphics algorithms in the >> same language, which would be huge! >> >> Concerning WebGL, I believe that WebGL itself is for the most things not >> that much slower. It's just more restrictive and doesn't have some options >> to really speed things up (complicated topic really). >> So "simple OpenGL" will have very comparable performance to WebGL. >> Also the whole stack around it makes it difficult, to interactively >> change and upload huge amounts of values from within julia... >> Well, all can surely be done with a lot of magic, but I think you end up >> with the same amount of work, like you would end up with when you cleanly >> implement it with Julia. >> While the latter leaves you with an incredible base to do even bigger >> things (Like having game engines and physics engines, OpenCL/CUDA and the >> like, which would be a great benefit for the scientific community). >> >> >> Am Montag, 23. Februar 2015 18:38:45 UTC+1 schrieb Samuel Colvin: >>> >>> To coincide (approximately) with the release of Bokeh v0.8.0 I've >>> released a significantly improved version of Bokeh.jl: >>> >>> http://bokeh.github.io/Bokeh.jl/ >>> >>> This is the first plotting library I've built and the first proper Julia >>> package. I would therefore really appreciate any feedback on the plotting >>> interface and the structure of the package itself. >>> >>> Bokeh.jl is still a bit rough round the edges and missing some basic >>> features, but the examples above demonstrate what it can do. >>> >>> Bokeh <http://bokeh.pydata.org/en/latest/> is an interactive plotting >>> library originally developed for python which uses HTML & Javascript as >>> it's backend to display and manipulate plots. >>> >>> Whether by using Bokeh or other libraries, web technologies are the >>> obvious option for Julia to get great visualization/graphics/UI without >>> the pain. >>> >>> I suggest (and I assume I'm about to get shot down) that the Julia >>> community stops messing around with any OS specific graphics code and >>> adopts HTML for all future visualizations. Are there any cases where that >>> wouldn't work? >>> >> >
