Julia is kind of dead? why still include it

[DanialAmini]

Julia is kind of good in the way that it has nearly identical syntax as matlab which makes it great for converting code. But as far as I've heard, it's a dead language. I worked with it for a while & it was great but I think the community support for it has also faded so I guess it would be better to not update it in future runs of the comparisons. Unless you know a niche sector that are still using it.

[GregVernon]

Julia is kind of good in the way that it has nearly identical syntax as matlab which makes it great for converting code.

Julia's syntax is not "nearly identical" to Matlab, it has some similarities but has moved way beyond Matlab's syntax.

But as far as I've heard, it's a dead language.

It's definitely not dead

I worked with it for a while & it was great but I think the community support for it has also faded so I guess it would be better to not update it in future runs of the comparisons.

Community is strong. See https://discourse.julialang.org/

Unless you know a niche sector that are still using it.

Julia is used in the following niche sectors: finance, aerospace, machine learning, statistics, economics, optimization, high-energy physics, computational mechanics, (general) numerical computing, simulations, biology, geo, and chemistry.

[DanialAmini]

Thank you for the explanation. When I started using Julia it was version 0.6 or 0.7 I think, I just realized version 1.0 is already released and the community is as strong as ever. Julia is certainly a good & lightweight competitor to the likes of Matlab for numerical work & without the propriety software restrictions.