Jonathan Malmaud
Jonathan Malmaud
Ya, that would definitely be better. At the time I wrote this, I wasn't sure if there was a mature enough Julia->Java bridge.
I suppose other 1-based languages could benefit as well...Matlab/Octave, Lua, and Mathematica come to mind. Re moving things out of `OpDef`: Indeed, for my purposes it only matters that the...
This might require a change in Julia base itself. Overwriting Base.warn inside the package doesn't seem effective at silencing warnings issues from other functions in Base.
One kind of warning (new definition ... is ambiguous with ...) is caused by code like function a()... function b()... then when its reloaded, the redefinition of a() is ambiguous...
Another kind issues a warning about redefining a type. This is mostly caused by modules importing a functionfrom base and defining a new method on it.
Ya, you're doing it right. The problem is I reduced the amount of constant-stripping this package performed after https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/5280, but a recent change to Julia base has caused reloading parametric...
I didn't realize the REPL could do that. Neat.
Some short examples that show how fragile the current situation is: ``` julia module M x=1 y=@fetch x end # Worker will crash here ``` ``` julia x=1 @fetch x+1...
Can you help me understand the motivation here - how does a 'message' differ from just sending a normal Julia type via RemoteRef?
I'm going to label this as a bug since it seems clear that this couldn't have been the intended semantics.