Assuming that this was fixed by caching the machine code, cant the same approach be used for packages ? Or to turn my question around: what is different about packages is it that they are not necessarily written in Julia ?
I have still not taken a serious plunge with Julia, testing waters.
Any plans for doing the same to individual scripts ? It would be handy to start off from the last known set of JIT'ed functions, may be retiring paths that are no longer frequented.
Yes - the base image is compiled to a shared library.
There is a mechanism for including package/user code in the system image if you compile Julia yourself. It works well with a wide range of packages, but the goal is to generalize this and make it usable with binary releases, and probably to compile packages to separate shared libraries.
I have still not taken a serious plunge with Julia, testing waters.
Any plans for doing the same to individual scripts ? It would be handy to start off from the last known set of JIT'ed functions, may be retiring paths that are no longer frequented.