krull10

Right now, using is as a “quick” command line utility for solving small problems is probably not a good Julia work flow (unless the overhead you mention doesn’t matter to your application). Where it shines is for longer-running or repeated computations where the initial compilation cost of starting a new REPL doesn’t matter.

The first time you run code in a REPL Julia will have to compile it. So starting a new REPL, and trying to solve a very small problem one time will currently be a terrible workflow for Julia (unless you don’t care that it may take a few seconds).

If you had run your code again within the same REPL you’d see it runs substantially faster the second time. Likewise, if you had tried to process a large enough matrix or CSV that compilation time should be a minimal subset of the total computing time, and probably not noticeable.

It isn’t a language limitation, just a tooling limitation. The startup times have been getting better as Julia develops, but there is still noticeable overhead the first time code gets run in a new REPL...

What about the Julia 1.0 language design do you find prevents general purpose programming?

Yes, in the sciences and engineering faster computers = larger, more accurate models one can feasibly study. So while the old models might run faster, many researchers will transition to solving more complicated problems that become just as slow as what we solve now.

We're not going to have a computer that can solve the Schrodinger Equation for a brain anytime soon.

I've been looking for a replacement for Papers for years; it just doesn't work well anymore with the lack of attention they've given it since the acquisition. For me subscription pricing is a no-go. It's sad, I would happily pay for a new standalone Papers...

Exactly, this is a major issue that non-academics always miss when talking about OA. The replacement to charging readers seems to have become a shift of costs to researchers, with an expectation they'll have lots of grants that are willing to pay huge publishing fees.

The only effective way I see to get around this is for granting agencies to start putting massive caps on what they are willing to pay for journal articles. If they mandate $200 max per article, no one is going to be able to afford a $5000 article anymore. Journals would be forced to adapt.

It is also highly debatable whether it is a good use of taxpayer funds to cover thousands of dollars in page charges (which is not uncommon for many journals these days). Think how much money could go towards funding more postdocs, graduate students or researchers, but is instead spent paying page charges to journals...

Not all researchers have thousands of dollars available in grants to cover the types of publishing fees that have become common as the burden of payment shifts from readers to researchers. Graduate students, postdocs or even professors may end up having to pay out of their own pocket to get a publication in a high-profile journal that is necessary to advance their career.

Most universities are run like a business. They are "non-profit" but essentially they are trying to generate "profits" that raise their endowment. Larger endowments mean more $ per year to spend on faculty, admin/staff, and student services/housing. Having more faculty and better student services/housing helps recruit more and stronger students...

Not with United. I had two flights in a row that I was all checked in with boarding passes on my phone, and then they bumped me due to an "equipment" change the night before my flight. In one case I was able to get a new seat immediately and re-checkin, in the other I had to show up at the airport four hours before my flight and beg for one of the few unassigned seats. Then I got to watch hysteria at the gate from all the people that got bumped... I've never had any other airline try to bump me at all, let alone after checking in.

(Just to add, I think the "changing" equipment claim is a common excuse they make up. It allows them to overbook and bump people without having to pay the US mandated fees to each person who gets bumped. In at least one of these cases they replaced the original plane with a plane of the same exact type, but claimed "it might have a different seat layout so it counts as an equipment change".)