Hacker News Reader

This feels like classic feedback from the Julia community. It really stifles any hope I have of the language recovering. I know there are reasons behind things, but they also seem blind to fixing the obvious stuff because of them

View on HN

And yet, would you not agree that the most important pain points do improve over time? Most of the things I mention in the post: Latency, stability, ecosystem maturity, static analysis and the IDE experience is notably better now than just 1 year ago.

Yes "user experience" things like that are improving. And StaticCompiler/GPUCompiler is making good progress.

But I see no movement on the deeper problems, like the limitations of the type system (no effort on traits, function types, interfaces, etc).

I agree progress on the deeper problems is slow, and I also think that it is slow because 90%+ of the issues people have with Julia are "user experience" things (see any of the help forums as well as all of the previous HN discussions). Given a limited amount of resources, it's difficult to justify a deep dive into revamping the type system (AIUI multiple dispatch with complex types + traits is mostly unexplored territory) over improving latency and tooling. That's not to say it shouldn't be done, but in the absence of some significant (financial and development) support behind it I don't think the type system work will be prioritized.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com