You're viewing a single thread.
Haven't tried Mojo yet but I have tried Julia and it kinda sucked balls. Sorry Julia fans, but it did. My main complaints:
- It's a research language like MATLAB, so the emphasis is on repl's, trying things out etc. But the compilation model is like C++. When you import a package it spends like 2 minutes compiling it. I think it's supposed to cache it but the second time it was still like 10 seconds for me just to import a package. I believe they've improved this since I used it but still, huge red flag.
- 1-based indexing. Come on guys. Anyone using this is smart enough to learn 0-based indexing. It's like putting a steering wheel in a jet fighter because you worry about pilots getting confused by a joystick. Again, red flag.
- The plotting libraries (a core feature for this sort of language) kind of sucks. In fairness nothing comes close to MATLAB on this front. I ended up paying for MATLAB because of that.
There's also this article which has more reasons.
I am leaving it a while longer before I try Mojo.
Your arguments and article are interesting, but...
1-based indexing. Come on guys. Anyone using this is smart enough to learn 0-based indexing.
Julia is high-level language. 1 is the one thing, 0 is nothing.
steering wheel in a jet fighter
The steering wheel is 0-based indexing.
High or low level doesn't matter. Mathematically it just makes more sense to use 0-based indexing https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD08xx/EWD831.html
I know what I am writing, 0 stands for nothing.
yes it means nothing. as in, you take the array, and move the reading position by nothing
You could phrase it like that for low-level lang, but it is so extra.....
More reason to like Julia