5 ms·

This is 7 years old. Julia is a totally different language by now. As a quick anecdote, in our take-home interview exercise, we usually receive answers in C++

This is 7 years old. Julia is a totally different language by now. As a quick anecdote, in our take-home interview exercise, we usually receive answers in C++ or Julia, and the two fastest answers have been in Julia.

d_tr 4mo ago
> This is 7 years old. Yeah, I actually totally forgot to check the date...
HarHarVeryFunny 4mo ago
I'd have to guess that this is because of ease of use. C++ lets you get as close to the metal as you choose to, so there is no reason why a C++ solution shouldn't be at least as fast as one written in any other language, and yet ... Of course it also depends on what additional libaries you are using, especially when it comes to parallel/GPU programming in C++, but easy to believe that Julia out of the box makes it easy to write high performance parallel software.
- tialaramex 4mo ago
  > C++ lets you get as close to the metal as you choose to This only ends up being true (for any language, but it's too often cited for C++) in a pretty useless Turing Tarpit sort of sense. So it's not "no reason" it's just sometimes impractical to solve some problems as well in C++ as in a language that was better suited. Now people do do impractical things sometimes. It's not very practical to swim across the English channel, but people do it. It's not very practical to climb Mt Everest, but loads of people do that for some reason. Going to the moon wasn't practical but the Americans decided to do it anyway. But the reason even the Americans stopped going for a long time is that actually "that was too hard and I don't want to" is in fact a reason.
  - sheepscreek 4mo ago
    Drawing from the analogies, what’s the Julia equivalent of them?
- SatvikBeri 4mo ago
  Yes, with unlimited development time I would expect C++ solutions to be as fast or faster. But Julia hits a really nice combination of development speed and performance that I haven't found in other languages, at least for number crunching and data pipelines.

d_tr 4mo ago

> This is 7 years old. Yeah, I actually totally forgot to check the date...

HarHarVeryFunny 4mo ago

I'd have to guess that this is because of ease of use. C++ lets you get as close to the metal as you choose to, so there is no reason why a C++ solution shouldn't be at least as fast as one written in any other language, and yet ... Of course it also depends on what additional libaries you are using, especially when it comes to parallel/GPU programming in C++, but easy to believe that Julia out of the box makes it easy to write high performance parallel software.

tialaramex 4mo ago
> C++ lets you get as close to the metal as you choose to This only ends up being true (for any language, but it's too often cited for C++) in a pretty useless Turing Tarpit sort of sense. So it's not "no reason" it's just sometimes impractical to solve some problems as well in C++ as in a language that was better suited. Now people do do impractical things sometimes. It's not very practical to swim across the English channel, but people do it. It's not very practical to climb Mt Everest, but loads of people do that for some reason. Going to the moon wasn't practical but the Americans decided to do it anyway. But the reason even the Americans stopped going for a long time is that actually "that was too hard and I don't want to" is in fact a reason.
- sheepscreek 4mo ago
  Drawing from the analogies, what’s the Julia equivalent of them?
SatvikBeri 4mo ago
Yes, with unlimited development time I would expect C++ solutions to be as fast or faster. But Julia hits a really nice combination of development speed and performance that I haven't found in other languages, at least for number crunching and data pipelines.