Of course, our view is that Julia is one such language that people should consider seriously. The talk linked here is a peek under the hood and shows that differentiable programming in Julia is not a special add-on, but something that fits naturally within the language.
A long time ago, Yann LeCun wrote Lush, which was a numerically-focused Lisp dialect, with a focus on C interop. It might be one of Julia's closest sibling.
> Lush is an object-oriented programming language designed for researchers, experimenters, and engineers interested in large-scale numerical and graphic applications. Lush is designed to be used in situations where one would want to combine the flexibility of a high-level, weakly-typed interpreted language, with the efficiency of a strongly-typed, natively-compiled language, and with the easy integration of code written in C, C++, or other languages.
A Lisp with expressive macro support is at least what is needed. Nothing I know of nothing else that has the affordances to support internal DSLs and creative control flow.
Julia as hygienic macros. From their documentation [1]: "The strongest legacy of Lisp in the Julia language is its metaprogramming support. Like Lisp, Julia represents its own code as a data structure of the language itself."
Parts of Julia are even implemented in Lisp [2], although they tend to be ported to Julia now IIUC. But it's clear the Julia developers are well aware of Lisp and its strong points.
https://venturebeat.com/2019/02/18/facebooks-chief-ai-scient...
Of course, our view is that Julia is one such language that people should consider seriously. The talk linked here is a peek under the hood and shows that differentiable programming in Julia is not a special add-on, but something that fits naturally within the language.