I wish it had more dedicated IDE besides the atom/electron based ones (like GNU Octave has its own). I think Julia's performance deserves an equally performant IDE.
This. I have been trying to learn Julia so I can promote it to replace Matlab in my company. I think everyone will like the performance, and a more modern and extensive library (also the fact that it's free will save the company a lot of money). But the atom Juno IDE looks so unprofessional, I think we will have a really hard time convincing scientists to use something which can't even undock the editor properly (I know we can open the file in a new window but it's really not the same).
Yeah, that is my guess too. But at least VS code can save your workspace in atom you have to install a package to do that. To programmers it might look like flexibility but to non programmers it just looks like a chore.
I don't really have issues with the performance of Visual Studio Code even though it's electron, but with Julia I mostly use it for the syntax highlighting, linting and autocompletion (plus version control and other external tools). I find it much easier to have a Julia instance running on a drop down terminal or in the second monitor for easy access, Revise so every file I save is automatically loaded in the REPL session and some extras like Rebugger, Infiltrator and OhMyREPL for debugging and some niceties.
This way I can just immediately query and test things using the language itself without having to deal with any sort of constraints or quirks within the editors. And the Julia REPL allows for quickly switching to shell (just pressing ;) when needed. I would hope they keep improving the REPL (and the editor support features like linters) over focusing on a completely new IDE (there is even more potential when considering Lisp languages REPL, plus general usability improvements like first call latency), but I'm biased and that's not the workflow most developers use.
