I'm a Julia user who has also given up as a Julia community member. The bubble is real. I found too often when I wanted to do something outside of that bubble and asked for help, I got unhelpful advice which amounted to "why do you want do something outside of our bubble?"
The "bubble effect" here was assumption that everyone has internet access and dependencies to external ( community maintained ) packages are zero cost.
Happily 2 years later this was resolved to my satisfaction.
Julia claims to "solve the two language problem". i.e. prototype in python, rewrite in c++. The two language problem is not solved with Julia if you can't effectively generate binaries.
I have never really heard the name "two language problem" to refer to what you are describing. Whenever I have heard these words it has referred to "I want a high-productivity newbie-friendly introspective language like python, but I do not want to write C modules when I need fast inner loops". Julia seems to solve this already, without providing compact binaries.
A sibling comment made a point about "compiling down to shared libraries" which seems similar to what you are describing, but that seems like it has little to do with "the two language problem".
Right. It used to be referenced on the front page of julialang.org Seems they don't really use that in the sale pitch anymore. Maybe that proves my point. It's easy to find references to julia claiming to solve the two-language problem though. I am someone who this two-language problem they speak of addresses.
I love Julia. Which is why it's so painful that I have to rewrite all my elegant Julia prototype code in C++, so I can compile into a shared lib for the users. Every. Single. Time. Two languages.
Now that it isn't the main front and centre claim, I feel a bit less bitter about using it as a prototyping language.
Waiting another 5 years and maybe it really will solve the two-language problem.
I think the main reason they stopped referencing that claim is that "two-language problem" means too many different things to different people. But yes, real static compilation would be great.
I think this is correct. My understanding of the two-language problem was probably not the same as the one they claimed to solve. More likely they meant: write slow code in python and then optimize inner loops with c.
Anyways, I'm glad I did invest in learning Julia. Just disappointed it didn't save me from C++. On to Rust!
It could only solve the two language problem if the "users" were writing their program in Julia themselves. Otherwise your ideal solution is still using two languages. And if they are writing their program in Julia, there's no reason to compile your code into a shared library; you'd just share a Julia package with them.
> Anyone know what the "select" cryptocurrencies are?
Ethereum is pretty much where everything is happening and has been the case for a few years. On that platform there's multiple projects that are interesting and show promise like Uniswap, Aave, Synthetic, Maker, Vechain, Filecoin, etc.
There is a fairly nuanced difference that doesn't really matter much unless you are a mathematician. Essentially in GA you'd do your differential geometry assuming a sort of ambient background space. In regular differential geometry the space of forms and vectors are abstracted and don't require a shared geometric embedding. I'm not a mathematician, so this is a very non-precise explanation, but that's how I understand it.
I've come to see it more as the inverse of a division operator. Like a quaternion can be defined as the ratio of two vectors q = a/b. then qb = a and qc will rotate c the same amount as needed to take b into a. dual quaternions have a similar motivating derivation.
This would mean that you have to make sure elsewhere in your code that the last coordinate is always normalised to 1, so do you win overall using this strategy? Plus, the same cast in the other method is ptr+1, which is assumedly just as fast.
Seems the problem with replicating cold fusion is that what most researchers do degrades the "lattice" that enables the reaction. So even if you do manage to get results, you won't be able to repeat it.
