PackageCompiler.jl VS Apache Arrow

Yes, julia can be called from other languages rather easily, Julia functions can be exposed and called with a C-like ABI [1], and then there's also various packages for languages like Python [2] or R [3] to call Julia code.

With PackageCompiler.jl [4] you can even make AOT compiled standalone binaries, though these are rather large. They've shrunk a fair amount in recent releases, but they're still a lot of low hanging fruit to make the compiled binaries smaller, and some manual work you can do like removing LLVM and filtering stdlibs when they're not needed.

Work is also happening on a more stable / mature system that acts like StaticCompiler.jl [5] except provided by the base language and people who are more experienced in the compiler (i.e. not a janky prototype)

[1] https://docs.julialang.org/en/v1/manual/embedding/

[2] https://pypi.org/project/juliacall/

[3] https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/JuliaCall/

[4] https://github.com/JuliaLang/PackageCompiler.jl

[5] https://github.com/tshort/StaticCompiler.jl

One of Julia's Achilles heels is standalone, ahead-of-time compilation. Technically this is already possible [1], [2], but there are quite a few limitations when doing this (e.g. "Hello world" is 150 MB [7]) and it's not an easy or natural process.

The immature AoT capabilities are a huge pain to deal with when writing large code packages or even when trying to make command line applications. Things have to be recompiled each time the Julia runtime is shut down. The current strategy in the community to get around this seems to be "keep the REPL alive as long as possible" [3][4][5][6], but this isn't a viable option for all use cases.

Until Julia has better AoT compilation support, it's going to be very difficult to develop large scale programs with it. Version 1.9 has better support for caching compiled code, but I really wish there were better options for AoT compiling small, static, standalone executables and libraries.

[1]: https://julialang.github.io/PackageCompiler.jl/dev/

Doesn’t work on Windows, but https://github.com/JuliaLang/PackageCompiler.jl does.

Also, you can precompile a whole package and just ship the binary. We do this all of the time.

https://github.com/JuliaLang/PackageCompiler.jl

And getting things precompiled: https://sciml.ai/news/2022/09/21/compile_time/

You can have a look at PackageCompiler.jl

I think by PackageManager here you mean package compiler, and yes these improvements do not need a 2.0. v1.8 included a few things to in the near future allow for building binaries without big dependencies like LLVM, and finishing this work is indeed slated for the v1.x releases. Saying "we are not doing a 2.0" is precisely saying that this is more important than things which change the user-facing language semantics.

And TTFP does need to be addressed. It's a current shortcoming of the compiler that native and LLVM code is not cached during the precompilation stages. If such code is able to precompile into binaries, then startup time would be dramatically decreased because then a lot of package code would no longer have to JIT compile. Tim Holy and Valentin Churavy gave a nice talk at JuliaCon 2022 about the current progress of making this work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnsONc9DYg0 .

This is all tied up with startup time and are all in some sense the same issue. Currently, the only way to get LLVM code cached, and thus startup time essentially eliminated, is to build it into what's called the "system image". That system image is the binary that package compiler builds (https://github.com/JuliaLang/PackageCompiler.jl). Julia then ships with a default system image that includes the standard library in order to remove the major chunk of code that "most" libraries share, which is why all of Julia Base works without JIT lag. However, that means everyone wants to have their thing, be it sparse matrices to statistics, in the standard library so that it gets the JIT-lag free build by default. This means the system image is huge, which is why PackageCompiler, which is simply a system for building binaries by appending package code to the system image, builds big binaries. What needs to happen is for packages to be able to precompile in a way that then caches LLVM and native code. Then there's no major compile time advantage to being in the system image, which will allow things to be pulled out of the system image to have a leaner Julia Base build without major drawbacks, which would then help make the system compile. That will then make it so that an LLVM and BLAS build does not have to be in every binary (which is what takes up most of the space and RAM), which would then allow Julia to much more comfortably move beyond the niche of scientific computing.

You're probably dancing around the edges of what [PackageCompiler.jl](https://github.com/JuliaLang/PackageCompiler.jl) is capable of targeting. There are a few new capabilities coming online, namely [separating codegen from runtime](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/41936) and [compiling small static binaries](https://github.com/tshort/StaticCompiler.jl), but you're likely to hit some snags on the bleeding edge.

In comes Polars: a brand new dataframe library, or how the author Ritchie Vink describes it... a query engine with a dataframe frontend. Polars is built on top of the Arrow memory format and is written in Rust, which is a modern performant and memory-safe systems programming language similar to C/C++.

I learned yesterday about GoLang's assembler https://go.dev/doc/asm - after browsing how arrow is implemented for different languages (my experience is mainly C/C++) - https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/main/go/arrow/math - there are bunch of .S ("asm" files) and I'm still not able to comprehend how these work exactly (I guess it'll take more reading) - it seems very peculiar.

The last time I've used inlined assembly was back in Turbo/Borland Pascal, then bit in Visual Studio (32-bit), until they got disabled. Then did very little gcc with their more strict specification (while the former you had to know how the ABI worked, the latter too - but it was specced out).

Anyway - I wasn't expecting to find this in "Go" :) But I guess you can always start with .go code then produce assembly (-S) then optimize it, or find/hire someone to do it.

One is related to the heritage of being built around the NumPy library, which is great for processing numerical data, but becomes an issue as soon as the data is anything else. Pandas 2.0 has started to bring in Arrow, but it's not yet the standard (you have to opt-in and according to the developers it's going to stay that way for the foreseeable future). Also, pandas's Arrow-based features are not yet entirely on par with its NumPy-based features. Polars was built around Arrow from the get go. This makes it very powerful when it comes to exchanging data with other languages and reducing the number of in-memory copying operations, thus leading to better performance.

IMO a good first step would be to use the txr FFI to write a library for Apache arrow: https://arrow.apache.org/

https://www.reddit.com/r/O3DE/comments/rdvxhx/why_python/ :

> Python is used for scripting the editor only, not in-game behaviors.

> For implementing entity behaviors the only out of box ways are C++, ScriptCanvas (visual scripting) or Lua. Python is currently not available for implementing game logic.

C++, Lua, and Python all implement CFFI (C Foreign Function Interface) for remote function and method calls.

"Using CFFI for embedding" https://cffi.readthedocs.io/en/latest/embedding.html :

> You can use CFFI to generate C code which exports the API of your choice to any C application that wants to link with this C code. This API, which you define yourself, ends up as the API of a .so/.dll/.dylib library—or you can statically link it within a larger application.

Apache Arrow already supports C, C++, Python, Rust, Go and has C GLib support Lua:

https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/main/c_glib/example/lua :

> Arrow Lua example: All example codes use LGI to use Arrow GLib based bindings

pyarrow.from_numpy_dtype:

AWS Data Wrangler is a Python library that simplifies the process of interacting with various AWS services, built on top of some useful data tools and open-source projects such as Pandas, Apache Arrow and Boto3. It offers streamlined functions to connect to, retrieve, transform, and load data from AWS services, with a strong focus on Amazon S3.

Worker should really adopt Apache Arrow, which has a much bigger ecosystem.

https://github.com/apache/arrow

Apache Arrow

I am aware of the fact that there are other posts about this issue but none of the ideas to solve it worked for me or sometimes none were found. The issue was discussed in the wheel git hub last December and seems to be solved but then it seems like I'm installing the wrong version? I simply used pip3 install pyarrow, is that wrong?