+1 John... everyone back to work! The core julia developers deserve a big pat on the back for the *incredible* attention to detail and thoughtfulness that has gone into designing the language. I've developed in a lot of scientific and non-scientific languages, and julia constantly makes me smile how they take the best features of every language I've ever coded in, and put them together seamlessly. No language is perfect, but you guys are trying. Thank you for all your hard work!
On Tuesday, April 28, 2015 at 7:58:07 PM UTC-4, John Myles White wrote: > > I think it's time for this thread to stop. People are already upset and > things could easily get much worse. > > Let's all go back to our core work: writing packages, building > infrastructure and improving Base Julia's functionality. We can discuss > naming conventions when we've got the functionality in place that Julia is > sorely lacking right now. > > -- John > > On Tuesday, April 28, 2015 at 4:47:51 PM UTC-7, François Fayard wrote: >> >> Ian. I am really sorry if I hurt people. I really respect what has been >> done with Julia. I kind of like when people push me in the corner because >> it helps me build better tools. That's why I might act this way, and I am >> sorry if it hurts people. >> >> I've expressed my ideas that I would like to resume: >> - I think consistency in naming is really important for big languages >> like Julia (as opposed to languages such as C) >> - I wanted to follow a style guide, and the one I've found is not >> respected at all. It's a fact. When I find LinAlg, sprandn and so many >> other names whereas the style guide says clearly that one should avoid >> abbreviation, I just don't get it. If a style guide is not enforced, it is >> useless because it does not pass the reality test. >> >
