Optimization.jl
Nim
Optimization.jl | Nim | |
---|---|---|
3 | 347 | |
663 | 16,079 | |
2.1% | 0.5% | |
9.7 | 9.9 | |
6 days ago | 6 days ago | |
Julia | Nim | |
MIT License | 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.
Optimization.jl
-
SciPy: Interested in adopting PRIMA, but little appetite for more Fortran code
Interesting response. I develop the Julia SciML organization https://sciml.ai/ and we'd be more than happy to work with you to get wrappers for PRIMA into Optimization.jl's general interface (https://docs.sciml.ai/Optimization/stable/). Please get in touch and we can figure out how to set this all up. I personally would be curious to try this out and do some benchmarks against nlopt methods.
-
Help me to choose an optimization framework for my problem
There are also Optimization and Nonconvex , which seem like umbrella packages and I am not sure what methods to use inside these packages. Any help on these?
-
The Julia language has a number of correctness flaws
> but would you say most packages follow or enforce SemVer?
The package ecosystem pretty much requires SemVer. If you just say `PackageX = "1"` inside of a Project.toml [compat], then it will assume SemVer, i.e. any version 1.x is non-breaking an thus allowed, but not version 2. Some (but very few) packages do `PackageX = ">=1"`, so you could say Julia doesn't force SemVar (because a package can say that it explicitly believes it's compatible with all future versions), but of course that's nonsense and there will always be some bad actors around. So then:
> Would enforcing a stricter dependency graph fix some of the foot guns of using packages or would that limit composability of packages too much?
That's not the issue. As above, the dependency graphs are very strict. The issue is always at the periphery (for any package ecosystem really). In Julia, one thing that can amplify it is the fact that Requires.jl, the hacky conditional dependency system that is very not recommended for many reasons, cannot specify version requirements on conditional dependencies. I find this to be the root cause of most issues in the "flow" of the package development ecosystem. Most packages are okay, but then oh, I don't want to depend on CUDA for this feature, so a little bit of Requires.jl here, and oh let me do a small hack for OffSetArrays. And now these little hacky features on the edge are both less tested and not well versioned.
Thankfully there's a better way to do it by using multi-package repositories with subpackages. For example, https://github.com/SciML/GalacticOptim.jl is a global interface for lots of different optimization libraries, and you can see all of the different subpackages here https://github.com/SciML/GalacticOptim.jl/tree/master/lib. This lets there be a GalacticOptim and then a GalacticBBO package, each with versioning, but with tests being different while allowing easy co-development of the parts. Very few packages in the Julia ecosystem actually use this (I only know of one other package in Julia making use of this) because the tooling only recently was able to support it, but this is how a lot of packages should be going.
The upside too is that Requires.jl optional dependency handling is by far and away the main source of loading time issues in Julia (because it blocks precompilation in many ways). So it's really killing two birds with one stone: decreasing package load times by about 99% (that's not even a joke, it's the huge majority of the time for most packages which are not StaticArrays.jl) while making version dependencies stricter. And now you know what I'm doing this week and what the next blog post will be on haha.
Nim
- 3 years of fulltime Rust game development, and why we're leaving Rust behind
-
Top Paying Programming Technologies 2024
22. Nim - $80,000
-
"14 Years of Go" by Rob Pike
I think the right answer to your question would be NimLang[0]. In reality, if you're seeking to use this in any enterprise context, you'd most likely want to select the subset of C++ that makes sense for you or just use C#.
[0]https://nim-lang.org/
- Odin Programming Language
-
Ask HN: Interest in a Rust-Inspired Language Compiling to JavaScript?
I don't think it's a rust-inspired language, but since it has strong typing and compiles to javascript, did you give a look at nim [0] ?
For what it takes, I find the language very expressive without the verbosity in rust that reminds me java. And it is also very flexible.
[0] : https://nim-lang.org/
-
The nim website and the downloads are insecure
I see a valid cert for https://nim-lang.org/
-
Nim
FYI, on the front page, https://nim-lang.org, in large type you have this:
> Nim is a statically typed compiled systems programming language. It combines successful concepts from mature languages like Python, Ada and Modula.
-
Things I've learned about building CLI tools in Python
You better off with using a compiled language.
If you interested in a language that's compiled, fast, but as easy and pleasant as Python - I'd recommend you take a look at [Nim](https://nim-lang.org).
And to prove what Nim's capable of - here's a cool repo with 100+ cli apps someone wrote in Nim: [c-blake/bu](https://github.com/c-blake/bu)
-
Mojo is now available on Mac
Chapel has at least several full-time developers at Cray/HPE and (I think) the US national labs, and has had some for almost two decades. That's much more than $100k.
Chapel is also just one of many other projects broadly interested in developing new programming languages for "high performance" programming. Out of that large field, Chapel is not especially related to the specific ideas or design goals of Mojo. Much more related are things like Codon (https://exaloop.io), and the metaprogramming models in Terra (https://terralang.org), Nim (https://nim-lang.org), and Zig (https://ziglang.org).
But Chapel is great! It has a lot of good ideas, especially for distributed-memory programming, which is its historical focus. It is more related to Legion (https://legion.stanford.edu, https://regent-lang.org), parallel & distributed Fortran, ZPL, etc.
- NIR: Nim Intermediate Representation
What are some alternatives?
StatsBase.jl - Basic statistics for Julia
zig - General-purpose programming language and toolchain for maintaining robust, optimal, and reusable software.
Petalisp - Elegant High Performance Computing
go - The Go programming language
OffsetArrays.jl - Fortran-like arrays with arbitrary, zero or negative starting indices.
Odin - Odin Programming Language
avm - Efficient and expressive arrayed vector math library with multi-threading and CUDA support in Common Lisp.
rust - Empowering everyone to build reliable and efficient software.
Distributions.jl - A Julia package for probability distributions and associated functions.
crystal - The Crystal Programming Language
StaticLint.jl - Static Code Analysis for Julia
v - Simple, fast, safe, compiled language for developing maintainable software. Compiles itself in <1s with zero library dependencies. Supports automatic C => V translation. https://vlang.io