DiffEqOperators.jl
JuliaInterpreter.jl
Our great sponsors
DiffEqOperators.jl | JuliaInterpreter.jl | |
---|---|---|
3 | 5 | |
281 | 157 | |
- | 1.9% | |
4.6 | 7.6 | |
11 months ago | 19 days ago | |
Julia | Julia | |
GNU General Public License v3.0 or later | GNU General Public License v3.0 or later |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
DiffEqOperators.jl
-
Julia 1.7 has been released
>I hope those benchmarks are coming in hot
M1 is extremely good for PDEs because of its large cache lines.
https://github.com/SciML/DiffEqOperators.jl/issues/407#issue...
The JuliaSIMD tools which are internally used for BLAS instead of OpenBLAS and MKL (because they tend to outperform standard BLAS's for the operations we use https://github.com/YingboMa/RecursiveFactorization.jl/pull/2...) also generate good code for M1, so that was giving us some powerful use cases right off the bat even before the heroics allowed C/Fortran compilers to fully work on M1.
-
Why are NonlinearSolve.jl and DiffEqOperators.jl incompatible with the latest versions of ModelingToolkit and Symbolics!!!? Symbolics and ModelingToolkit are heavily downgraded when those packages are added.
(b) DiffEqOperators.jl is being worked on https://github.com/SciML/DiffEqOperators.jl/pull/467 .
-
What's Bad about Julia?
I like that they are colored now, but really what needs to be added is type parameter collapasing. In most cases, you want to see `::Dual{...}`, i.e. "it's a dual number", not `::Dual{typeof(ODESolution{sfjeoisjfsfsjslikj},sfsef,sefs}` (these can literally get to 3000 characters long). As an example of this, see the stacktraces in something like https://github.com/SciML/DiffEqOperators.jl/issues/419 . The thing is that it gives back more type information than the strictest dispatch: no function is dispatching off of that first 3000 character type parameter, so you know that printing that chunk of information is actually not informative to any method decisions. Automated type abbreviations could take that heuristic and chop out a lot of the cruft.
JuliaInterpreter.jl
-
Do you use Julia for general purpose tasks?
The projects page is a list of suggestions of projects that someone has already said they want to run. If you can find a mentor, you can submit a project for anything. For potential performance improvements, I'd look at https://github.com/JuliaDebug/JuliaInterpreter.jl/issues/206, https://github.com/JuliaDebug/JuliaInterpreter.jl/issues/312, and https://github.com/JuliaDebug/JuliaInterpreter.jl/issues/314. I'm not sure if Tim Holy or Kristoffer have time to mentor a project, but if you're interested in doing a gsoc, ask around in the Julia slack/zulip, and you might be able to find a mentor.
-
Julia 1.7 has been released
I would not go as far as calling it very naive, there has certainly been some work put into optimizing performance within the current design.
There are probably some gains to be had by using a different storage format for the IR though as proposed in [1], but it is difficult to say how much of a difference that will make in practice.
[1] https://github.com/JuliaDebug/JuliaInterpreter.jl/pull/309
-
What's Bad about Julia?
You're right, done some more research and there seems to be an interpreter in the compiler: https://github.com/JuliaDebug/JuliaInterpreter.jl. It's only enabled by putting an annotation, and is mainly used for the debugger, but it's still there.
Still, it still seems to try executing the internal SSA IR in its raw form (which is more geared towards compiling rather than dynamic execution in a VM). I was talking more towards a conventional bytecode interpreter (which you can optimize the hell out of it like LuaJIT did). A bytecode format that is carefully designed for fast execution (in either a stack-based or register-based VM) would be much better for interpreters, but I'm not sure if Julia's language semantics / object model can allow it. Maybe some intelligent people out there can make the whole thing work, is what I was trying to say.
-
Julia: faster than Fortran, cleaner than Numpy
It could, but that is a lot more work than it sounds. It might be easier to make it possible to swap out the compiler for one that is much faster (LLVM is slow but does good optimisations, other compilers like cranelift are faster but produce slower code). There is a Julia interpreter but it was written in Julia itself (it was written to support debuggers), so it doesn't really solve the latency issues.
-
Julia: Faster than Fortran, cleaner than Numpy
If you need to run small scripts and can't switch to a persistent-REPL-based workflow, you might consider starting Julia with the `--compile=min` option. You can also reduce startup times dramatically by building a sysimg with PackageCompiler.jl
There is also technically an interpreter if you want to go that way [1], so in principle it might be possible to do the same trick javascript does, but someone would have to implement that.
[1] https://github.com/JuliaDebug/JuliaInterpreter.jl
What are some alternatives?
Gridap.jl - Grid-based approximation of partial differential equations in Julia
Diffractor.jl - Next-generation AD
BoundaryValueDiffEq.jl - Boundary value problem (BVP) solvers for scientific machine learning (SciML)
DaemonMode.jl - Client-Daemon workflow to run faster scripts in Julia
ApproxFun.jl - Julia package for function approximation
Tullio.jl - ⅀
FourierFlows.jl - Tools for building fast, hackable, pseudospectral partial differential equation solvers on periodic domains
julia-numpy-fortran-test - Comparing Julia vs Numpy vs Fortran for performance and code simplicity
julia - The Julia Programming Language
Infiltrator.jl - No-overhead breakpoints in Julia
oxide-enzyme - Enzyme integration into Rust. Experimental, do not use.
rust - Empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software.