People won't apply my critique on Matlab or R, because these languages are assumed to be slow and they must be slow. So there is no "risk/variance" (in the good sense) for these language. No sooner one learns to write vectorized code, than he reaches the limit of these languages.
However, Julia is assumed to be fast (high expectation), and performance varies a lot according to the knowledge/skill a programmer own (high variance). Contrast to the low/high expectation and low variance of other languages, this is the reason why users are not happy with Julia, because Julia exposes their (including me) incapacity that they have previously comfortably concealed. So the complaints here are in fact one's frustration on his incapacity. (Disclaimer: no offense meant.) Aware of my incapacity, I really hope the documentation could be more dummy friendly. On Thursday, September 24, 2015 at 7:18:18 PM UTC+2, Kristoffer Carlsson wrote: > > These criticisms are frankly ridiculous. When your critique could be > applied to any programming language that exists then you are doing it > wrong. > >
