juliapackagecomparisons / juliapackagecomparisons.github.io Goto Github PK

It might provide a nice overview to tag pages with the mentioned packages, to get a list of packages when viewing the tags.

Sockets std lib, ZMQ, and any other

Mention Base.ccall and Base.@CCall, Cxx.jl, CxxWrap.jl, and Clang.jl.

Edit: This should probably be a subsection under the Interoperability section.

It currently holds a lot of template stuff.

• AutoHashEquals.jl
• StructEquality.jl
• StructEqualHas.jl

Based on this discourse post I believe this field deserves a section.

Relevant packages:

• LLMTextAnalysis.jl
• TextAnalysis.jl

Relevant org: JuliaText

This would greatly help asses the activity and populatity of packages, but manually adding it is too much work.

Serialization stdlib vs BSON.jl vs JLD.jl vs JLD2.jl, Arrow.jl, Parquet.jl, Parquet2.jl, possibly others.

Interesting comparisons: stability, speed, serialized object size, dependencies, package load speed (and the normal ones: stars, activity, number of maintainers, under an org etc)

• Check if all commands in Deploy.yml don't throw errors.
• Provide some preview pages. (maybe in another repository?)
• Spell check

x-ref: #55 (comment)

People interested in web development are likely to search for web and may be interested in both kinds of websites. There are a substantial number of possible sections, so combining sections where possible will reduce the cognitive load of browsing the website.

It'd be nice for the sidebar to just be a static element on all pages — it needn't be collapsable, I think

Bigfloats, and whatever is mentioned in this discussion.

• JSON.jl
• JSON2.jl
• JSON3.jl
• LazyJSON.jl
• JSONBase.jl

related post in reddit: So many JSON libraries; which should I use?

Seems like a large meta-section (maybe even too much)

On the page for Numerical nonlinear solvers, a subsection should be added for polynomials. It should mention https://juliamath.github.io/Polynomials.jl/stable/#Root-finding, https://github.com/jverzani/AMRVW.jl and https://github.com/giordano/PolynomialRoots.jl.

4 packages exists to the best of my knowledge for this:

• MixedStructTypes
• SumTypes
• Unityper
• Expronicon (with ADT.@adt)

Julia packages to create a package:

• PkgTemplates.jl
• PkgSkeleton.jl

Not Julia packages, but tools to create a package:

• Ion
  • CLI tool to create a Julia package
• JSOTemplate.jl
  • GitHub repository template

I recently decided to try https://github.com/svilupp/PromptingTools.jl, which lead me to discover https://github.com/ThatcherC/ReplGPT.jl. I am sure there are others as well. It would be nice to collect tools for interacting with generative AI. Perhaps Generative AI should be a meta-section, and interaction would be one subsection. Then, tools for making and working with new generative AI models could be a separate section.

Perhaps Large Language Models is a more accurate/appropriate grouping, but I am not really one to make that evaluation.

Edit: https://github.com/rory-linehan/OpenAI.jl is also relevant.

See https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-rationalfunctionapproximation-jl/104118/4 for mention of at least 3 relevant packages.

A lot of really good content for such a section in the release announcement for chairmarks. It might also be relevant to mention Profiler, ProfView, PProf and friends in the same section.

I am making a logo for the documentation (and organization).

@KronosTheLate
Do you have any thoughts on the logo?
If this direction looks okay, I will update the logo for the final adjustment!

Hi! Great Project, already found a useful package!!

Minor point: Makie has now 2.1k Stars, Plots only 1.8k
In the section it currently says Plots is more popular than Makie.

If you agree, I could do a minor edit on the section.
Best, Benedikt

Using GitHub.jl, one can automatically find the default branch for repositories. It should be possible to save a dictionary mapping a package name to a default branch to a (CSV?) file, and use that file to determine branchnames. If the key is missing for any package, it could be added as needed, which should be rare enough (only when adding new packages) that we would not require GitHub.jl to make authentuicated requests.

Also, potential homepages could be polled using GitHub.jl, which might be a nice link to have handy.

This would all just make it slightly easier to add new packages, at a one-time cost. But for now, there is more important and low-hanging fruit, and I think that this is not currently a priority.

There is https://github.com/pjabardo/CurveFit.jl, https://github.com/m3g/EasyFit.jl, https://juliahub.com/ui/Packages/GLM, https://github.com/JuliaNLSolvers/LsqFit.jl, just that I know of.

Both file IO (saving and loading, currently a seperate section), file-transfer data streaming.

A related term is data aquisiton, for which there is at least https://github.com/JaneliaSciComp/NIDAQ.jl. More DAQ packages available at https://juliapackages.com/packages?search=daq.

All required info to make page can be found here: https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-coordrefsystems-jl/111950/15

There are several packages for interval sets.

• IntervalSets.jl
• Intervals.jl
• IntervalArithmetic.jl

Related issues

• JuliaMath/IntervalSets.jl#67
• invenia/Intervals.jl#94

It should be split into general tools and toolboxes, and specific domains. ModelingToolkit and DifferentialEquations definitively belon in here somewhere.

The specific domain that inspired this issue is FluidDynamics, where I would like a comparison between https://github.com/CliMA/Oceananigans.jl and https://github.com/weymouth/WaterLily.jl.

I just learned about DocumenterVitepress.jl, which builds on top of Documenter.jl.

There is also Pollen.jl. Given all three (or more) options, I think a section on documentation packages is in order.

They are strictly static page generators, but I feel like documentation and generic site generation are different enough that these deserve completely separate sections. Perhaps they kan link to each other in the start.

• Quaternions.jl
  • The most popular package that I am one of the maintainers.
  • Discourse announcement
• Quaternionic.jl
  • This package was created when Quaternions.jl was not well-maintained.
  • Actively maintained, and there seem different features than Quaternions.jl

Some packages define their own quaternions, but that might be replaced with Quaternions.Quaternion in the future (https://discourse.julialang.org/t/taking-quaternions-seriously/44834/70).

• Makie.jl should now use Quaternions.Quaternion (Makie.jl/src/utilities/quaternions.jl).
• There was an issue in ReferenceFrameRotations.jl. to be compatible with Quaternions.jl (ReferenceFrameRotations.jl#25).

Another package Grassmann.jl seems able to handle quaternions.

/CONTRIBUTING.md file is not written for franklin docs, but the page is deployed at https://juliapackagecomparisons.github.io/CONTRIBUTING/.
This can be fixed by moving all Franklin-related filed to docs directory. The solution is the same as in Franklin.jl.

This would be generally useful. It would paricularly help users who only know of a single relevant package, who could then seach to see if it is mentioned in any section.

Thank you for maintaining this cool website!
I would like to open a PR to create a new section B-spline.

• BSplines.jl
• BSplineKit.jl
• BasicBSpline.jl (My package!)
• NURBS.jl

I'm not familiar with these packages except for mine, so I'm planning to request reviews from the package authors for fairness.

• Comonicon.jl
• ArgParse.jl
• Fire.jl
• DocOpt.jl

It appears like mostly what we need is available on this comparison page for Interpolations.jl. Possibly whoever wrote that (@mkitti ?) can help out here, if interested ^_^

Currently, the page on plotting is mainly a copied comment from discourse. It needs significant reworking.

A rough outline for the new format I have in mind is as follows:

"""

Intro

Say that we will split plotting packages into general purpose, specific styles (grammar of graphics, and other styles if others exist), and specific domains like maps, brain-scan data and stuff like that.

Most popular general packages

Compare Makie and Plots as the most popular options for general purpose plotting. General jist is that Plots is the fastest option to get you most of the way there, and enjoys good integration via recipes. Makie is a little more verbose, and is heavier (longer precompilation), but is one of the most flexible and custumizable plotting systems of any programming language (I am not 100% sure about that, but I think it is true).

Does Gadfly belong here?

Grammar of graphics

This is a specific style of plotting that some people enjoy a lot. Options include Vega and Vegalite, ggplot wrappers (Gaston I think), AlgebraOfGraphics, perhaps more.

Plots.jl backends that are usable as standalone packages

Specific domains:

Notebook plotting

If a plot created as HTML code, it can be embedded directly into HTML exports of Pluto and Jupyter notebooks, maintaining interactivity in a static document. PlotlyJS is great for this. There is also PlutoPlots. I am still not sure about their differences.

Terminal plotting

UnicodePlots.jl, Sixel.jl, SixelTerm.jl, mageInTerminal.jl, and KittyTerminalImages.jl are all relevant here. Also worth mentioning that GR and Gaston provide buildt-in sixel-support.
"""

If you have opinions on how to structure this page, please chime in ^_^

• https://github.com/pfitzseb/ProfileCanvas.jl
• https://github.com/timholy/ProfileView.jl
• https://github.com/kimikage/ProfileSVG.jl

Tagging @giordano and @baggepinnen as the main contributors of the mentioned packages.

Hey guys. The JuliaPackageComparisons section on Uncertainty Propagation could use a helping hand, but I am not fit to write it. Could you help out by sharing your thoughts? I want to have more clear information about:

• The differences between your packages
• General recommendations. In the style of "For most users, A will be suitable. If you are doing X, you will want to use B. If performance is key, use C."
• I do not know about other packages in this domain. If you guys do, please mention them.

Also, is "Uncertainty Propagation" the best name? Both packages mention measurements, but that felt too general for me. Thoughts welcome.

If all you have time for is a brief comment, it's still super helpful. Getting some quality content from qualified people is the most important thing. If you find the time to make a PR, it would be fantastic.

JuMP.jl, Optim.jl, Optimization.jl. relevant post: https://discourse.julialang.org/t/jump-jl-vs-optimization-jl/112736/12

The badges for last commit and codecov are broken for repos which do not use master as the default branch name.

The "custom badge" badge is also always "inaccessible" IDK what that means.

Originally posted by @LilithHafner in #84 (review)

The issue is likely that all PkgSpec entries say "branch=master". The fix is to manually check each repo for what the default branch is. Alternatively, it should be possible to automate this, and not provide a branch.

A meta-section is planned for comparing different resources that compare/provide overviews of julia packages.

It would be nice to also have a meta-section for comparing resources that argue for Julia as a programming language, or that generally compare Julia and other programming languages.

The resource that I found which made me open this issue is https://github.com/Datseris/whyjulia-manifesto. I only assume that there will be a number of similar resources around the web.

How should graphs be embedded into pages?

• SaferIntegers.jl
• CheckedArithmetic.jl

There should be a section that contains projects similar to this one, such as https://gensjulia.pages.dev/.

Distributed stdlib, Dagger, Malt

Copied from: #47 (comment)

• Add meta-section in the sidebar (#22)
• Search (#3)
• Add logo (#51)
• #70
• Add "copy to clipboard" button to each code block
• Add darkmode

There are already a lot of sections, and it can be hard to keep an overview of the sidebar. A search functionality (mentioned in #3) would help a lot, but the sorting should be sorted out in any case.

Current sorting suggestions:

• Alphabetical (current sorting)
• By number of stargazers of packaged mentioned in section
• Grouping related domains into meta-domains

Or some combination of the above, e.g. sorting by stargazers but making an exception to put nonlinear and linear solver sections next to each other. Or sorting between meta-domains by stargazers, and within them alphabetically. It might also be nice to include the sum of stargazers of mentioned packages in the sidebar-entry, which could be combined by any of the sorting rules.

Or perhaps all of the above. I am no website wizard, but I believe it should be possible to change the sorting by a drop-down. As a band-aid fix, there could be a separate overview-page for each sorting that each contains all sections, but sorted by different rules. The user could then visit the overview-page with the sorting that they find the best.

Conciderations:
The page should be easy to get an overview of. Alphabetical is simple, and facilitates looking for specific domains. It does however run the risk of drowning domains that are important to many between domains that are only important to a few. This last problem is best tackled by stargazer-sorting. And then there is the issue of putting related domains next to each other, which is conceptually cleaner.

It is probably a better macro-section because (one of) the main point to use some of those packages is to avoid union-splitting