HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
JuliaData
DataFrames.jl
Julia2013–2023
JuliaData / DataFrames.jl

DataFrames.jl

In-memory tabular data in Julia

5Distinct people
5Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
1.8KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

In-memory tabular data in Julia

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 7:56:55 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year5 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2013-08-28 14:30:15 UTC to 2023-04-01 11:23:09 UTC.

012013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments20132014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20182019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2023

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20132013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20142014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC110
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

1 sources
I don't think we've seen the final state of it though. v1.9 really gives people the proper tools for solving latency problems. Before, invalidations hurt a little, but it was also kind of a wash because LLVM code didn't precompile, so you could spend time setting up a Snoopprecompile and fix some invalidations and end up LLVM bound saving 1 second out of 20. But with package images it's almost always better to fix precompilation. The only thing hampering time much now is the `using` time went up, but as mentioned in the Reddit post there's a lot of ideas for what to do there. The other thing is package extensions, which cut down the amount of code to load. There's tons of PRs floating around the ecosystem turning things into extensions, and thus cutting down the overall code that is actually ran and loaded. This means that in a few months
Read the rest
, people will start to see some major tangible benefits from following the compilation improvement practices laid out here and https://sciml.ai/news/2022/09/21/compile_time/. I think then you'll have a lot more people start to take all of these new tools seriously and it will be standard to incorporate them into packages. Right now they are still kind of niche things for packages with known TTFX problems, but I think come v1.9 you'll see every major package use all of these methods. > Different packages are affected differently I think this is one of the pieces that's effected by this. I don't think "Julia has become optimised for running Plots.jl" is quite correct. Julia's compilation and runtime is much more optimized for well-inferred code, which Plots.jl is not. However, the compiler developers have been using Plots.jl as a test case for all of these new tools, and therefore its SnoopPrecompile and invalidations have gotten some dramatic improvements because those required ecosystem changes I mentioned are being done by the compiler team for this specific package. Plots.jl had things like precompilation snooping way back before there was even a package for it, the earliest I know of was around v1.0. Meanwhile, DataFrames.jl only setup its precompilation snooping 7 months ago (https://github.com/JuliaData/DataFrames.jl/pull/3182), which I would presume was just in time for the v1.8 mark on your plot and is one of the big reasons for having a sudden drop (which continues into v1.9 because of package images). What I mean to say then is that, I think all packages will get the improvements we've seen from Plots.jl, but package authors will need to update their packages in order for that to happen. Some packages have already done this, many have not.
In Julia's latency: Past, present and future

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.