You have just seen, that it could be just as likely been considered, that Zig already fulfills that role.
And that is a very different language, then Julia.
So, I think any notion of “Julia is a different form of X” is inherently flawed.
What fascinates me about Julia, is that it’s probably one of the more unique languages.
I really love looking into new, and very innovative languages, who do things different.
What Julia does with its type system, multiple dispatch, and the strong scientific background of the community, is unmatched, and really contributes to the value proposition of Julia.
To me, and again, I may be different here, is Julia ideally seen as one of the firsts of its kind.
The first of a new generation.
And not so much as a new iteration of something old.
As said, I think people from old languages are not as likely to come over, as some people still think.
So comparing languages with each other might be not as effective, because it short sells the value.
@Eben60 You have a typo, its include("myscript.jl")
I will try that now, and I like to note, that I always said the approach in the video is too complicated.
Somebody said VSCode supports that process, and I now wonder why this is not what the |> button does by default.
It seems not very well documented either.
To have a dev container, or something similar, as part of the official installation instructions.
Ideally, we would default to reproducible systems, when we advise other people how to start with Julia.
They are just much more reliable.