On Julia 1.0 and related tools, I recently put something together for a grant proposal, basically summarizing various issues on github and discussions we have been having. I need to do some cleanup, but will share something here in a few days. We can then iterate on it and publish it as a roadmap on julialang.org.
-viral On Tuesday, May 19, 2015 at 3:57:17 AM UTC+5:30, Isaiah wrote: > > The milestone flags are useful references (nothing really set in stone at > this point though, AFAIK). > > > https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3A0.5 > > https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3A1.0 > > > On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 6:19 PM, Tony Kelman <t...@kelman.net> wrote: > >> Aside from semver.org, I'm going to guess not yet. But I'm also not >> privy to any private discussions that may have happened within Julia >> Computing. (Hopefully we can avoid there needing to be too many of those >> related to the language itself) >> >> >> On Monday, May 18, 2015 at 1:41:17 PM UTC-7, Michael Francis wrote: >>> >>> Out of interest is there a definition of 1.0 ? >>> >>> On Sunday, May 17, 2015 at 12:29:19 AM UTC-4, Tony Kelman wrote: >>>> >>>> Julia might get Microsoft's attention at some point. You could go vote >>>> for >>>> http://feedback.azure.com/forums/257792-machine-learning/suggestions/7668225-julia-support-in-azureml-studio, >>>> >>>> for one thing. >>>> >>>> The recently-released VS Code editor also looks very nice, and as soon >>>> as it supports plugins it would be very worthwhile to look at making a >>>> Julia plugin for it. >>>> >>>> I've also recently been in touch with someone from the Microsoft MPI >>>> team, it might end up being tractable to get some libraries and Julia >>>> packages that use MPI for parallelism to work on Windows too. We'll have >>>> to >>>> see. >>>> >>>> Regarding getting to Julia 1.0 faster, we also very badly need more >>>> influence within the LLVM community. Keno has a large number of patches >>>> open to make LLVM and MCJIT work better for Julia, but they're not getting >>>> reviewed by enough people. Having Julia Computing get enough resources to >>>> hire, say, the top few dozen contributors full-time would absolutely help >>>> things advance faster, but I don't think it should be rushed either. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Saturday, May 16, 2015 at 6:07:05 PM UTC-7, Eric Forgy wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Very cool reading: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/11196 >>>>> >>>>> I occasionally write code, but to call myself a "developer" would be >>>>> an insult to you guys who are doing awesome things :) >>>>> >>>>> If Julia apps are ever going to target enterprises in a serious >>>>> manner, there absolutely must be solid support for Windows. I'll keep my >>>>> eyes open for ways to help out. >>>>> >>>>> On Saturday, May 16, 2015 at 8:32:31 PM UTC+8, Steven G. Johnson wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> If you are a Windows developer, it would be great to have your help >>>>>> in getting/keeping Julia running smoothly on Windows; only a few of the >>>>>> most active developers use Windows regularly right now. Probably the >>>>>> biggest improvement will be the transition to libgit (issue #11196), as >>>>>> the >>>>>> package system on Windows is deathly slow at the moment. >>>>>> >>>>> >
