I have a fondness for the Julia language and its wonderful community. My statement about Mojo surpassing Julia was solely grounded in the two factors elaborated in the video. Embracing Julia brings unique benefits, which is why I've curated a Julia Programming for Beginners playlist on my channel! I shared these thoughts to avoid any potential misconceptions among devoted Julia enthusiasts.
Hi, I do not necessary think that leveragin on the python syntax will be a winning factor for mojo vs julia, as a syntax newly designed from scratch could win agains a language designed in the early 90s. Thanks to pycall, you can use the full python ecosystem very easily on julia and vice versa, so even the ecosystem argument is not that strong in my opinion. Mojo is not the first attempt to speedup python. Cython also does it (and quite well), however how many python programmers do actually use cython? Also, fast mojo code is very far from pure python code, almost a completwly new language. Is thus solving the 2 language problem for applications requiring high performance? (Indeed a similar argument also holds for Julia, with the difference that in julia it does not exist something like bare julia and enhanced julia, even if very fast julia code could be quite hard to get for a beginner). No critiques here, just interested in some discussion on the question about the future of scientific computing.
Hi, I don't know how I missed this video in you channel. But as always good content! 🎉 Now that Mojo is open source (since March 28), I am excited to dive deeper into it! Thank you for clarifying your Mojo vs Julia statement. However, I still found your comparison with Julia for scientific computing a bit "curious" and unnecessary (it can lead to unproductive programming languages war). It's important to remember that folks like Chris Lattner and dedicated Julia developers focus on problem solving rather than competition (for instance Chris Lattner respects Julia). After all and as you wrote, Mojo and Julia serve different purposes and excel in their own rights. Julia aims to bridge the gap between ease of use and high performance (easily achievable), while Mojo leverages the vast Python ecosystem with top-notch performance enhancements by replacing Python code. It's misleading to talk about one language "beating" another. Each has its unique strengths depending on the task at hand. As programmers, being fluent in multiple languages allows us to choose the right tool for the job. Given that both Mojo and Julia are evolving, there's so much potential for growth. In a nutshell: comparing programming languages without context is like comparing apples and bananas - it's all about finding the right fit for specific needs.
Absolutely! Choosing the right tool for the job is key, and that's why I explore different programming languages in my videos. Each language shines in specific areas. On that note, I see Mojo as a positive addition to the programming landscape. Healthy competition (Even waging programming language wars, haha!) drives innovation, pushing both Julia and Mojo developers to create features and improvements that benefit users. This can take the form of faster performance, easier development, or a wider range of capabilities.
Good question! While Mojo is a promising new language designed for AI development, it's still in its early stages and isn't yet widely adopted by major companies. Learning Mojo today carries some risk in terms of immediate job prospects, but it could be a valuable long-term investment if the language gains wider adoption in the future.
I have a fondness for the Julia language and its wonderful community. My statement about Mojo surpassing Julia was solely grounded in the two factors elaborated in the video. Embracing Julia brings unique benefits, which is why I've curated a Julia Programming for Beginners playlist on my channel! I shared these thoughts to avoid any potential misconceptions among devoted Julia enthusiasts.
Hi, I do not necessary think that leveragin on the python syntax will be a winning factor for mojo vs julia, as a syntax newly designed from scratch could win agains a language designed in the early 90s.
Thanks to pycall, you can use the full python ecosystem very easily on julia and vice versa, so even the ecosystem argument is not that strong in my opinion.
Mojo is not the first attempt to speedup python. Cython also does it (and quite well), however how many python programmers do actually use cython? Also, fast mojo code is very far from pure python code, almost a completwly new language. Is thus solving the 2 language problem for applications requiring high performance? (Indeed a similar argument also holds for Julia, with the difference that in julia it does not exist something like bare julia and enhanced julia, even if very fast julia code could be quite hard to get for a beginner).
No critiques here, just interested in some discussion on the question about the future of scientific computing.
Hi, I don't know how I missed this video in you channel. But as always good content! 🎉
Now that Mojo is open source (since March 28), I am excited to dive deeper into it!
Thank you for clarifying your Mojo vs Julia statement. However, I still found your comparison with Julia for scientific computing a bit "curious" and unnecessary (it can lead to unproductive programming languages war). It's important to remember that folks like Chris Lattner and dedicated Julia developers focus on problem solving rather than competition (for instance Chris Lattner respects Julia). After all and as you wrote, Mojo and Julia serve different purposes and excel in their own rights. Julia aims to bridge the gap between ease of use and high performance (easily achievable), while Mojo leverages the vast Python ecosystem with top-notch performance enhancements by replacing Python code.
It's misleading to talk about one language "beating" another. Each has its unique strengths depending on the task at hand. As programmers, being fluent in multiple languages allows us to choose the right tool for the job. Given that both Mojo and Julia are evolving, there's so much potential for growth.
In a nutshell: comparing programming languages without context is like comparing apples and bananas - it's all about finding the right fit for specific needs.
Absolutely! Choosing the right tool for the job is key, and that's why I explore different programming languages in my videos. Each language shines in specific areas.
On that note, I see Mojo as a positive addition to the programming landscape. Healthy competition (Even waging programming language wars, haha!) drives innovation, pushing both Julia and Mojo developers to create features and improvements that benefit users. This can take the form of faster performance, easier development, or a wider range of capabilities.
@@Numeryst I completly agree with you friend! Healthy competition along these lines is excellent for improvement. Wise words!
Do any big companies use Mojo today? What are the job prospects of learning Mojo today (as opposed to a future date when it may be more in demand)?
Good question! While Mojo is a promising new language designed for AI development, it's still in its early stages and isn't yet widely adopted by major companies. Learning Mojo today carries some risk in terms of immediate job prospects, but it could be a valuable long-term investment if the language gains wider adoption in the future.
Mojo does not provide job oportunities sadly. Wouldnt go there without actual python knowledge
Since it is going to be the superset of Python, having Python knowledge would always be a plus. As far as I know, the Modular is hiring.
mojo will replace all programming language.
It surely has the potential.
can mojo use Django?
You can import Python packages while using Mojo.
How to download mojo for windows ?
For now, you have to install Mojo on WSL for Windows. Please check out this video:
th-cam.com/video/ZdatyWxYc6I/w-d-xo.html
Doesn't Julia also use MLIR?
Mojo is the first major language designed expressly for MLIR.
Mlir and mojo have the same cofounder , who is also the creator of swift