StatsBase.jl
clasp
Our great sponsors
StatsBase.jl | clasp | |
---|---|---|
5 | 47 | |
559 | 2,487 | |
0.0% | 1.1% | |
6.2 | 9.8 | |
17 days ago | 6 days ago | |
Julia | Common Lisp | |
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.
StatsBase.jl
-
Downloading packages to Julia 0.7
so finally I tried running Pkg.add(Pkg.PackageSpec(url="https://github.com/JuliaStats/StatsBase.jl", rev="v0.24.0")) but encountered an error saying in needed to download dependencies like DataStructures.
-
Julia ranks in the top most loved programming languages for 2022
Well, out of the issues mentioned, the ones still open can be categorized as (1) aliasing problems with mutable vectors https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/39385 https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/39460 (2) not handling OffsetArrays correctly https://github.com/JuliaStats/StatsBase.jl/issues/646, https://github.com/JuliaStats/StatsBase.jl/issues/638, https://github.com/JuliaStats/Distributions.jl/issues/1265 https://github.com/JuliaStats/StatsBase.jl/issues/643 (3) bad interaction of buffering and I/O redirection https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/36069 (4) a type dispatch bug https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/41096
So if you avoid mutable vectors and OffsetArrays you should generally be fine.
As far as the argument "Julia is really buggy so it's unusable", I think this can be made for any language - e.g. rand is not random enough, Java's binary search algorithm had an overflow, etc. The fixed issues have tests added so they won't happen again. Maybe copying the test suites from libraries in other languages would have caught these issues earlier, but a new system will have more bugs than a mature system so some amount of bugginess is unavoidable.
-
The Julia language has a number of correctness flaws
Most of these seem to be about packages in the ecosystem (which, after clicking through all links, actually almost all got fixed in a very timely manner, sometimes already in a newer version of the packages than the author was using), not about the language itself. Other than that, the message of this seems to be "newer software has bugs", which yes is a thing..?
For example, the majority of issues referenced are specific to a single package, StatsBase.jl - which apparently was written before OffsetArrays.jl was a thing and thus is known to be incompatible:
> Yes, lots of JuliaStats packages have been written before offset axes existed. Feel free to make a PR adding checks.
https://github.com/JuliaStats/StatsBase.jl/issues/646#issuec...
clasp
-
I Accidentally a Scheme
I accidentally a Common Lisp that interoperates with C++ (https://github.com/clasp-developers/clasp.git). We would also like to move beyond BDWGC and Whiffle looks interesting. I will reach out to you and maybe we can chat about it.
-
Val, a high-level systems programming language
Clasp might be such a language, it seems.
-
Proof of Concept clang plugin that automatically binds C/C++ -> Lua
Sounds to me like CLASP; it automatically exports C++ objects to be used from Common Lisp also via llvm.
-
What help is needed for Lisp community in order to make Lisp more popular?
So..
"Why do you want to make Lisp more popular? If you were sucessful, what would be different in the world, and why is that desirable to you?"
Normally at this point I'd listen to the response, and ask more questions based on that. That would wind up with a very, very deep thread, so I'll break a cardinal rule and pre-guess at some answers.
This kind of question comes up pretty frequently. In many cases, I suspect the motivation behind the question is "Wow! Here's this cool tool I've discovered. I want to make something really useful with it. I want to do it as part of a community effort; share my excitement with others, share in their excitement, and know that what I'm making is useful because others find it desirable and are excited by it." The field could be cooking, sports, old machine tools, tiny homes, or demo scene. Its the fundemental driver for most content on HN, YouTube, Instructables, and such. It is a Good Thing.
If that is your motivator, then my suggestion is to find something that bugs you and fix it. You've already decided you're only interested in code, not other aspects. You said you preferred vim, but the emacs ecosystem has a very rich set of sharp edges that need filing off, and a rich set of tools with which to attack them.
One example: even after 50 years there's no open IDE which allows you to easily globally rename a Lisp identifier. I don't know about LispWorks or other proprietary environments, but you can't in emacs or vim do a right-click on "foo" in "(defun foo ()...)" and select a command which automatically renames it in all invocations. [Queue lots of "but you can..." replies here.] I don't think vim is up to the task of doing this internally. It would be possible in emacs; but would require a huge effort with lots of help from other people. If you emerged alive from that rabbit warren you'd join the company of Certified "How Hard Could it Be?" Mad Scientists such as Dr. "I just want to draw molecules" Meister [1] and "Wouldn't an OS in Lisp be Cool" Froggey [2].
[1] https://github.com/clasp-developers/clasp
[2] Mezzano https://github.com/froggey/Mezzano
-
Linux Kernel 6.1 Released with Initial Rust Code
But also, there's a reason why most implementations readily make an effort to provide interoperability tools with a variety of runtimes. Clasp much like ABCL gives access to a whole library of other libraries trivially wrapped to interoperate with at little to no performance to cost (depending on how thin you make the wrappers, mainly).
If you must interop with the existing C++ codebase, Clasp might be worth taking a look at.
-
Clasp benchmark vs SBCL and ECL?
I remember I read somewhere that Clasp binaries were about 100x slower than SBCL (around 2020?)
-
Research on performance-oriented, high-level languages?
Something like Clasp is the only thing I could think of that would get you even close to what you're asking about. https://github.com/clasp-developers/clasp, designed to be used for molecular engineering. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X69_42Mj-g
- Clasp: A Common Lisp implementation using LLVM for compilation to native code
- Why Haskell Is Interesting?
What are some alternatives?
Wren - The Wren Programming Language. Wren is a small, fast, class-based concurrent scripting language.
gdb-dashboard - Modular visual interface for GDB in Python
CL-CXX-JIT - Common Lisp and CXX interoperation with JIT
Lux.jl - Explicitly Parameterized Neural Networks in Julia
SICL - A fresh implementation of Common Lisp
graalvm-clojure - This project contains a set of "hello world" projects to verify which Clojure libraries do actually compile and produce native images under GraalVM.
Petalisp - Elegant High Performance Computing
immer - Postmodern immutable and persistent data structures for C++ — value semantics at scale
Optimization.jl - Mathematical Optimization in Julia. Local, global, gradient-based and derivative-free. Linear, Quadratic, Convex, Mixed-Integer, and Nonlinear Optimization in one simple, fast, and differentiable interface.
sol2 - Sol3 (sol2 v3.0) - a C++ <-> Lua API wrapper with advanced features and top notch performance - is here, and it's great! Documentation:
maru - Maru - a tiny self-hosting lisp dialect
voltron - A hacky debugger UI for hackers