Re: [julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

> > Of course I can use high level wrappers around the existing library > functions, but this will cause a significant negative impact on the > performance, that is why I want to implement this functionality on top of > the lowest level. Why would having the standard library present make what

Re: [julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

I want to change the behaviour and implementation of some language features. In other words, I need my own little standard library that most accurately meets my needs. Of course I can use high level wrappers around the existing library functions, but this will cause a significant negative

Re: [julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

I think I've shown that it isn't too difficult (I started my Julia-lite branch originally just a couple months after learning Julia), it's mostly some tedious work, and most people are concentrating on other (very important) stuff. I pushed to make this because I was interested in having things

Re: [julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

I agree that more should be backed out to packages. Even as a math person who would probably never Julia without linear algebra, I think that some of the linear algebra should move out to a JuliaMath package, and then part of the standard startup script should be to "using LinAlg". That way if

Re: [julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

You should try out my "lite" branch of Julia, I got it back in sync with master yesterday, made sure it still passed the unit tests, etc. https://github.com/ScottPJones/julia/tree/spj/lite I don't think it's so black and white as Avik and Stefan have made it seem. My lite branch takes less than

Re: [julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

Tamas is dead on – see the intro of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dK3zRXhrFZY for an explanation. Being able to define even the most basis types in Julia itself is one of the most powerful features of the language. Let's back up a little here. What are you trying to accomplish? On Tue, Jun 14,

[julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

So. I stepped deeper into the Julia standard library and found some interesting things. I mean intrinsic functions. If I understand correctly this is the glue between the language core and the library. Is there any documentation about intrinsics? понедельник, 6 июня 2016 г., 17:42:02 UTC+4

Re: [julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

Look at it this way: Julia is so powerful that many language features can be implemented natively, instead of using primitives. On Tue, Jun 14 2016, Dmitry wrote: > That's what I was afraid of. It comes that Julia is very strongly tied to > its library. I was hoping that it would be like with

Re: [julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

That's what I was afraid of. It comes that Julia is very strongly tied to its library. I was hoping that it would be like with most other languages, for example C++. I mean C++ know about basic types and how to work with them (and much more) even without the standard library. понедельник, 6

Re: [julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

You don't need .jl files to run Julia once it's built, you just need the julia binary and various dynamic libraries. On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Páll Haraldsson wrote: > On Monday, June 6, 2016 at 5:17:16 PM UTC, Stefan Karpinski wrote: >> >> Really useless – it

Re: [julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

On Monday, June 6, 2016 at 5:17:16 PM UTC, Stefan Karpinski wrote: > > Really useless – it doesn't know about integers or how add them, for > example. If you want to trim down the standard library, you can try editing > out parts of base/sysimg.jl and rebuilding, but that's kind of a tricky >

Re: [julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

Thanks for mentioning it! There've been so many changes recently in master lately, that I've let it get a bit behind, I'll try to get it back to keeping pace with v0.5. I've tried to make it so that you can select which parts of Julia that you want in (like Sparse arrays, LinAlg, BigInt,

Re: [julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

Don't know whether this is something you'd be interested in, but Scott Jones has worked on building a Julia "lite" version with fewer components: https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!searchin/julia-users/raspberry$20pi/julia-users/WStpLtrKiFA/JhiAbc-vAwAJ

Re: [julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

Really useless – it doesn't know about integers or how add them, for example. If you want to trim down the standard library, you can try editing out parts of base/sysimg.jl and rebuilding, but that's kind of a tricky process. On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Avik Sengupta

[julia-users] Re: Can I somehow get Julia without standard library?

Julia is pretty useless without its standard library. On Monday, 6 June 2016 14:42:02 UTC+1, Dmitry wrote: > > I tried to remove ".jl" library files from Julia installation directory, > but it did not help. Then I tried to remove "libjulia.dll" but it does not > want to run without this file.