You both have excellent responses, I'm just commenting on those in case 
people find interesting and/or want to compare and contract with Seed7 or 
other languages.

Can anyone look at Julia (and Seed7) at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_programming_languages

confirm info is correct, add (or correct) if something is missing (or 
propose here or at Wikipedia's "Talk-page", if you think 
conflict-of-interest applies; shouldn't apply for clear cut-correct info).


In case people like to compare Seed7 to Julia (or Java):
http://seed7.sourceforge.net/faq.htm#java_comparison

"All parameters are call-by-value"

"Arrays are present in many programming languages, but they are usually 
hard-coded into the compiler / interpreter. Seed7 does not follow this 
direction. Instead it introduces abstract data types as common concept 
behind arrays, structs, hashes and other types."

[I knew Dylan was slow and failed despite multiple dispatch (and Common 
Lisp, only other MD language I was familiar with, is well Lisp, with list, 
not arrays as main data structure, not modern/fast/good enough for at least 
Julia's audience, for not just that reason.]

On Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 6:57:26 AM UTC, Tamas Papp wrote:

> Also, this is hard to accept, but languages succeed and fail partly for 
> random or trivial reasons.


Very true..
 

> Timing also matters: a language may fail 
> because the existing technology is not yet ready for it (think of 
> implementing Julia before LLVM), or succeed because they are the first 
> language to scratch a particular itch,


What I was thinking of with Seed7, there are so many similarities (Julia 
seemed redundant with it, but I also see differences when looking more 
closely), maybe it was ahead of the times; maybe the speed wasn't up to 
par, needed LLVM(?), while nothing wrong with the language's syntax. Julia, 
succeeds not just because of the syntax, also in large part because of the 
implementation (e.g. LLVM). I recalled having seen Seed7 was fast (can 
compile to C..), I may misremember/confuse with another language (e.g. 
Nim[rod]). Benchmarks for seed7 are really difficult to google for..

Julia seems to be filling a vacuum in the scientific community. It is 
> fast (Fortran/C), yet interactive/user-friendly (R/Matlab/Octave), and 
>

[Hopefully not just there..]

About "Who's the audience for Seed7? I googled Seed7 BLAS .." Maybe that's 
its flaw, at least Julia's FFI (and included libraries) are one of its 
killer features, while I'm not looking for BLAS etc.


Maybe that was it, not clear goals targeting say scientific (or good enough 
marketing), that really needed a new language?


One thing I forgot to check, REPL in Seed7:

Unclear about a REPL (interpreter must be the same for them?) with "Seed7 
allows the interpretation and compilation of programs with any license. 
There is no restriction on the license of your Seed7 programs." and I only 
saw this using the REPL term:

"Command line utilities. E.g.:
   
   - A calculator that works like a read-eval-print loop (REPL) 
   <http://seed7.sourceforge.net/scrshots/calc7.htm>"



I guess REPL/"dynamic" is now almost required for any new language to 
succeed (I see a REPL is coming to Java 9, not only Beanshell).

This wasn't thought possible in a fast language previously, Julia proved 
wrong, now one of the key "selling points" (solving the "two language" 
problem).


is available for free (which not only saves the cost of a license, but
>

Some languages fail for (cost or) non-Windows support (or only MinGW), or 
maybe (unfairly?) because GPL, none of which seemed to apply (LGPL) to 
Seed7:
 
"Windows is supported with several compilers:

    MinGW GCC (the binary Windows release of Seed7 uses MinGW)
    Cygwin GCC (the X11 graphics needs Cygwin/X)
    MSVC cl.exe (cl.exe is the stand-alone compiler of MSVC)
    BDS bcc32.exe (bcc32.exe is the stand-alone compiler of the BDS)"

"Seed7 allows the interpretation and compilation of programs with any 
license. There is no restriction on the license of your Seed7 programs."


http://blog.fourthbit.com/2014/03/01/the-best-programming-language-or-how-to-stop-worrying-and-love-the-code

-- 
Palli.

Reply via email to