These are a few of my Favourite Things (that are coming with Julia 1.0)

If I were more musically talented I would be writing a song ♫ Arguments that are destructured, and operator characters combine-ed; Loop binding changes and convert redefine-ed… ♫ no none of that, please stop.

Technically speaking these are a few of my Favourite Things that are in julia 0.7-alpha. But since since 1.0 is going to be 0.7 with deprecations removed, We can look at it as a 1.0 list.

Many people are getting excited about big changes like Pkg3, named tuples, field access overloading, lazy broadcasting, or the parallel task runtime (which isn’t in 0.7 alpha, but I am hopeful for 1.0) I am excited about them too, but I think they’re going to get all the attention they need. (If not then they deserve a post of their own each, not going to try and squeeze them into this one.) Here are some of the smaller changes I am excited about.

These are excepts from 0.7-alpha NEWS.md

Destructuring in function arguments: when an expression such as (x, y) is used as a function argument name, the argument is unpacked into local variables x and y as in the assignment (x, y) = arg ([#6614]).

This will mean the way I attempt to write do blocks with multiple arguments will work foo do (a,b)

Also it makes the following work:

julia > foo (( a , b ), c ) = ( a + b ) c foo ( generic function with 1 method ) julia > foo (( 1 , 2 ), 3 ) 9

This is one of the more obscure python features that I missed when switching to julia.

Custom infix operators can now be defined by appending Unicode combining marks, primes, and sub/superscripts to other operators. For example, +̂ₐ″ is parsed as an infix operator with the same precedence as + ([#22089]).

This means unlimited infix operations can be defined, without allowing some of the unread-ability that just letting words be used as infix would do. Obviously should still be used with caution, and I think the need to use unicode will cause surficent caution and strike a good balance. It should be understood that julia supporting editors (including vim and emacs) transform e.g. \_2 into ₂ on a tab . But still, that extra combination of key-presses I think will make people use them with caution. Which should stop us seeing an unreadable mess.

Overall I’m not sure how often it will be used, but I think adding a subscript/superscript letter/number or two will show up. Silly example:

julia > + ₂ ( a , b ) = sqrt ( a ^ 2 + b ^ 2 ) + ₂ ( generic function with 1 method ) julia > 1 + ₂ 2 2.23606797749979

The missing singleton object (of type Missing ) has been added to represent missing values ([#24653]). It propagates through standard operators and mathematical functions, and implements three-valued logic, similar to SQLs NULL and R’s NA .

It is kind of like nan for floating point numbers – it propagates contaminating everything it touches. But unlike nan it doesn’t (semantically) represent a particular notion of mathematical/IEEE error, but represents the notion of the data being in some sense missing. It will hopefully make a lot of code clearer.

It becomes possible because of the small unions optimization. One can contrast Array(Union{Missing,T}) with DataArray{T} from DataArrays.jl, especially if you go back and look at the older tags. One can also contrast Array(Union{Nothing,T}) with Array{Nullable{T}} and NullableArray{T} from the deprecated NullableArrays.jl.

It will be interesting to see exactly how nothing and missing play out in-practice. I feel like if all things go well, then in most circumstances operating with a missing should return a missing (i.e. propagation), and operating with a nothing should throw an error (Much like a NullReferenceError ).

Values for Enum s can now be specified inside of a begin block when using the @enum macro ([#25424]).

Nice little QOL improvement: Consider:

@enum Fruit apple = 1 orange = 2 kiwi = 4

vs

@enum Fruit begin apple = 1 orange = 2 kiwi = 4 end

The fallback constructor that calls convert is deprecated. Instead, new types should prefer to define constructors, and add convert methods that call those constructors only as necessary ([#15120]).

Conversion and construction are not really the same thing at all. And this will get rid of the long error message in:

julia > type Foo end julia > Foo ( 2 ) ERROR : MethodError : Cannot `convert` an object of type Int64 to an object of type Foo This may have arisen from a call to the constructor Foo ( ... ), since type constructors fall back to convert methods . Stacktrace : [ 1 ] Foo ( :: Int64 ) at ./ sysimg . jl : 77

{ } expressions now use braces and bracescat as expression heads instead of cell1d and cell2d , and parse similarly to vect and vcat ([#8470]).

Everyone is familiar with infix operator overloading, and prefix operator overloading. Julia actually has what I would call circumfix operator overloading. [a b] can be overloaded by overloading the hcat function. [a; b] can be overloaded by overloading the vcat , function. Normally these are used for arrays concatenation/construction. But overloading them is cool, I do it in TensorFlow.jl. In TensorFlow.jl, this constructs nodes in the symbolic graph that perform the concatenations, once the graph is executed. I am using it right now in a project and it is fairly nice, espcially when combining with slicing syntax.

This is how I output colors in HSV. It is better to train to target the sin/cos of hue, so I need that in my graph.

Y_sat = nn . sigmoid ( Y_logit [ : , 3 ]) Y_val = nn . sigmoid ( Y_logit [ : , 4 ]) Y_hue_sin = tanh ( Y_logit [ : , 1 ]) Y_hue_cos = tanh ( Y_logit [ : , 2 ]) Y_hue_o1 = Ops . atan2 ( Y_hue_sin , Y_hue_cos ) Y_hue = reshape ( Y_hue_o2 , [ - 1 ]) # force shape, this I should fix Y = [ Y_hue Y_sat Y_val ]

Anyway, to get back on point: This language change means that braces ( {} ) can be overloaded in the same away. They’ve basically been sitting there wasting since julia 0.4 when there use as Matlab-style cell arrays was replace by just having an array typed as Any .

Not sure I have any uses for it right now, but it open’s up options. There are a few other backet-type unicode characters, so maybe in the 1.x timeframe we might also be able to overload those as circumfix. (and maybe use them for call/ getindex type overload too).

In for i = ... , if a local variable i already existed it would be overwritten during the loop. This behavior is deprecated, and in the future for loop variables will always be new variables local to the loop ([#22314]). The old behavior of overwriting an existing variable is available via for outer i = ... .

, if a local variable already existed it would be overwritten during the loop. This behavior is deprecated, and in the future loop variables will always be new variables local to the loop ([#22314]). The old behavior of overwriting an existing variable is available via . In for i in x , x used to be evaluated in a new scope enclosing the for loop. Now it is evaluated in the scope outside the for loop.

, used to be evaluated in a new scope enclosing the loop. Now it is evaluated in the scope outside the loop. In for i in x, j in y , all variables now have fresh bindings on each iteration of the innermost loop. For example, an assignment to i will not be visible on the next j loop iteration ([#330]).

These are just nice. Messing with your iteration variables of the for-loop leads to hard to read/comprehend code. This makes it harder get any advantage out of doing so, so discourages people from doing it.

Also, #330 is the oldest issue closed by this release it is from 2012 – about 6 years ago. To this day there remains only 8 open issues older than it. Contrast the newest issue/PR number in this is #27212, an improvement to interface for matrix factorizations, written under 2 weeks ago.

Prefix & for by-reference arguments to ccall has been deprecated in favor of Ref argument types ([#6080]).

ccall used to be really magic. While #18754 made it less so – it is still pretty magic. It looks like a function, but it is not a function at all, but an actual part of the language. Notice from example that in both 0.6 and 0.7 it’s first parameter needs to be resolve-able at compile time: so

julia > ccall (( Symbol ( "clock" ), "libc" ), Int32 , ()) ERROR : TypeError : anonymous : in ccall : first argument not a pointer or valid constant expression , expected Ptr , got Tuple { Symbol , String } julia > ccall (( : clock , "libc" ), Int32 , ()) 6978742

But at least with this change it doesn’t use the & operator entirely differently to the rest of the language.

begin is disallowed inside indexing expressions, in order to enable the syntax a[begin] (for selecting the first element) in the future ([#23354]).

This isn’t a 0.7 feature so much as a promise of a 1.x feature (hopefully 1.0). Like we can say x[end] we’ll be able to say x[begin] , not a huge advantage most of the time, for single use we have first , and for standard arrays we can say x[1] but for arrays with unusual indexing, like in OffsetArrays.jl, this will make code a lot clearer.

Consider being able to write x[begin:2:end] for every second element.

@__DIR__ returns the current working directory rather than nothing when not run from a file ([#21759]).

This is just nice, it is what you expect to happen. DataDeps.jl has some specialized code to deal with exactly this case. (and said code had bugs, which I am not proud of considering it should be a simple work-around; but I was over using default arguments at the time.)

The promote function now raises an error if its arguments are of different types and if attempting to convert them to a common type fails to change any of their types. This avoids stack overflows in the common case of definitions like f(x, y) = f(promote(x, y)...) ([#22801]).

This is good. I encountered similar issues when writing this line, though it doesn’t use promote. The fact that you are hitting a promote at all, means that nothing accepting these argument types exists, so if you’re promoting them and not getting a new type, then there is no hope for you to find something better to do with them anyway.

The logging system has been redesigned - info and warn are deprecated and replaced with the logging macros @info , @warn , @debug and @error . The logging function is also deprecated and replaced with AbstractLogger and the functions from the new standard Logging library. ([#24490])

The new logging system, is really cool. It is a lot prettier in the console for a start. @warn includes a 1-line backtrace showing where it was triggered. The whole system is configurable and extendable. Its nice.

module_name has been deprecated in favor of a new, general nameof function. Similarly, the unexported Base.function_name and Base.datatype_name have been deprecated in favor of nameof methods ([#25622]).

It was annoying not having Base.function_name and Base.datatype_name exported. I kept forgetting how to do it, and having around inside fields of the type.

The syntax using A.B can now only be used when A.B is a module, and the syntax using A: B can only be used for adding single bindings ([#8000]).

I’ve never been a fan of TMTOWTDI. While julia is a TMTOWTDI language, there is no need to be excessive. As they say TIMTOWTDIBSCINABTE.

The keyword importall is deprecated. Use using and/or individual import statements instead ([#22789]).

This is good, it was generally a bad-idea, and I don’t know anyone who was using it seriously. It is easy enough to recreate with some metaprogramming and names(::Module, true) .

permutedims(m::AbstractMatrix) is now short for permutedims(m, (2,1)) , and is now a more convenient way of making a “shallow transpose” of a 2D array. This is the recommended approach for manipulating arrays of data, rather than the recursively defined, linear-algebra function transpose . Similarly, permutedims(v::AbstractVector) will create a row matrix ([#24839]).

Good, being unable to transpose arrays of strings in 0.6 (without giving dims) was annoying. No more:

julia > [ "alpha" "omega" ] ' 1 ×2 RowVector { Any , ConjArray { String , 1 , Array { String , 1 }}} : Error showing value of type RowVector { Any , ConjArray { String , 1 , Array { String , 1 }}} : ERROR : MethodError : no method matching transpose ( :: String ) julia > #err no mistakes have been made, that hasn't worked since 0.5 julia > reshape ([ "alpha" , "omega" ], ( : , 1 ) ) 2 ×1 Array { String , 2 } : "alpha" "omega" julia > [ "alpha" "omega" ; "beta" "gamma" ] ' ERROR : MethodError : no method matching transpose ( :: String ) julia > # Oh No. mistakes have been made, AGAIN, that hasn't worked since 0.5 julia > permutedims ([ "alpha" "omega" ; "beta" "gamma" ], ( 2 , 1 )) 2 ×2 Array { String , 2 } : "alpha" "beta" "omega" "gamma"

0.6 used reshape to transpose vectors of strings, and permutedims to transpose matrices of strings.

Now we can just do permutedims without specifying the dims for both.

julia> permutedims(["alpha", "omega"]) 1×2 Array{String,2}: "alpha" "omega" julia> permutedims(["alpha" "omega"; "beta" "gamma"]) 2×2 Array{String,2}: "alpha" "beta" "omega" "gamma"

Not quiet as brief as a apostrophe, but still permutedims for both is a lot clearer. And this means we are taking transpose seriously still (read these 417 comments, over 3 years to know what that means).

mv , cp , touch , mkdir , mkpath , now return the path that was created/modified rather than nothing ([#27071]).

This is my only real contribution to Base in the 0.7 timeframe. It is just one of those tiny “I assumed it always worked that way” things that are technically breaking changes, that are good to get in before they become blocked until Julia 2.0.

These seem to be missing from the change log, but they are going to make a whole lot of iterators easier to define.

In 0.6 one had to define 3 functions:

start(iterable) which returned the initial state

which returned the initial next(iterable, state) which return (element, newstate)

which return and done(iterable, state) returning a boolean to indicate if done.

This often mean one would have to read-ahead and store future element in the state so that one could check if a source was going to be empty when done was called. It was an annoying pattern. The changes proposed in Julep #18823 are now in.

Now there is just one function iterate

iterate(iterable) returns the initial state and the first element (basically same as start + next combined)

returns the initial and the first element (basically same as + combined) iterate(iterable, state) returns the newstate and the next element (basically same as next )

returns the and the next element (basically same as ) However both the 1-arg and 2-arg forms return nothing when there are no more items (i.e. what uesd to be check for in done .) This is going to make a lot of code easier to write.

See the docs, and Eric Davies excellent blog post on the changes

It’s not in the changelog, because it is basically invisible to users, but thanks to the work of @pkofod and several others, julia is now really close to not shipping with a C based math library. A pure julia math library at the lowest level. I suggested that here, though I am sure I wasn’t the first to suggest it. It will be much nicer to maintain, and I think, given the people working with julia, will in time exceed(/become) the state of the art, in performance and accuracy. (To my knowledge there are no speed regressions with this change, so it can only get better.)

Julia 0.7-alpha is still shipping openlibm. There is a solid chance that 1.0 won’t, and if not 1.0 then definitely gone in the 1.x timeframe.

The inlining heuristic now models the approximate runtime cost of a method (using some strongly-simplifying assumptions). Functions are inlined unless their estimated runtime cost substantially exceeds the cost of setting up and issuing a subroutine call. ([#22210], [#22732])

Inference recursion-detection heuristics are now more precise, allowing them to be triggered less often, but being more agressive when they are triggered to drive the inference computation to a solution ([#23912]).

Inference now propagates constants inter-procedurally, and can compute various constants expressions at compile-time ([#24362]).

I love me some optimizations. My code, becoming just faster, without me doing anything about it? What is not to like about that?

From what I hear there will be a lot of optimization work being done in the 1.x timeframe. Since the language itself will not be changing so much anymore.

Conclusion

So yes, these are a few of my favourite things in julia 0.7-alpha, and thus what I anticipate for Julia 1.0. It is a big release, there are a whole lot more things that I’ve not included in this list. But they might be a few of your favourite things. Here is the link to the NEWS.md again