Also a lot of people left early on because their concerns and use cases were dismissed as "holding it wrong". Thus what's left of Julia audience is just the one they catered for.

The big selling point from the getgo was that Julia is general purpose. It's now over 10 years and it's still about as general purpose as MATLAB (although on a totally different level design-wise).

A big smell from the getgo was 1-based indexing. I appreciate that it's more familiar from some branches of math and physics (and MATLAB), and it's something I could live with, but more or less all general purpose languages index from zero. And there's a good reason for that. And that makes interoperability trickier.

https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD08xx/E...

I think the julia team is still relatively small. So it might be was they have to do to make meaningful progress?

I honestly do not understand comments like this with regard to an open source project. The language and its libraries are rather hackable as is with rather powerful packages. While I may not agree with every decision, I do not complain that someone is not implementing my favorite feature. I just do it myself.

I frankly would be concerned if the main contributors were not focused.