On 03/05/2017 09:27 AM, Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: > > Erik Edrosa <erik.edr...@gmail.com> writes: > >> I think one issue when you want to compare languages like Python to >> Scheme is that these languages are dominated by a single >> implementation. > > I read this argument repeatedly, but it does not apply to C and C++, two > of the most widely used languages. Therefore that argument might just > interpret too much into a coincidence — or rather: into a situation > which happens in the beginning of language development. > > Even Java nowadays has several different implementations. >
C, C++, and Java have very large specifications and standards which are meant to keep the various implementations as compatible as possible. Although implementations do provide their own extensions and there is issues between OSes. I agree this argument isn't too strong, but I see it brought up once in awhile. One issue is it does fracture the community a bit. If implementations have greater compatibility you see developers use them in interesting ways. For example in Common Lisp, I've heard some developers will use CCL in development because it compiles faster and produces easier to debug code and use SBCL for building releases because it produces faster code. >> an awesome application to show off the >> power of the language, good tooling, and some luck. > > And zealots, never forget zealots. I’d dare to say that people, who > believe that the language or tool is the best thing in existence and > give lots of talks about it, are a far too easily underestimated factor > in the success of any tool. > > Best wishes, > Arne > I think we have many of those. ;) - Erik
