Even outside stats, Julia is a moving target, with nontrivial changes in syntax and semantics in the core language, and large changes in library code.
While this is natural (and beneficial) in a new language, one has to have a preference for other benefits (eg the clarity and the design of the language) to be an early adopter, so I can fully understand if someone would rather wait for things to stabilize a bit more -- nothing wrong or irrational about that. For this reason, while I am happy to talk about how nice Julia is, I will not try to convince people to switch to it. IMO the people who are potential switchers at this stage have already looked at Julia, and evangelizing more aggressively could be counterproductive at this stage. Best, Tamas On Wed, Mar 04 2015, Iain Dunning <[email protected]> wrote: > Related to that, we haven't convinced anyone to move away from R for > stats/data analysis, and I personally haven't tried. The tooling isn't as > good yet, so I can't advocate for it in good faith to the average person. I > think John Myles White's POV on this is basically that you should use Julia > for stats at this stage only if you are willing to actually get your hands > quite dirty with fixing and improving packages, and I'd agree.
