It seems like the core of the issue has to do with array indices vs function application. Julia uses curly brackets for type parameters because it can't use bra

It seems like the core of the issue has to do with array indices vs function application. Julia uses curly brackets for type parameters because it can't use brackets because they are taken for array notation. But what's wrong with less than or greater than for type parameters? If it's followed by colons for contravariant/covariant types, I don't see why it can't be used for both. Julia's great, but the Pascal-like 'begin and 'end' delimiters strike me as incredibly ugly. There are many alternatives that I can see (such as the one I mentioned above) that would obviate this situation. I consider myself a 'mathy' person (I work as a quant), but even so, Julia is a very odd language. All of these compromises or whatever just to please the math people who have a hard time programming. Some of these things the more I think about them are great (array indices starting at one make a lot of sense, actually) and the ability to just write '2x' instead of '2*x' is growing on me. I guess I don't know what my point is. Maybe it's that Julia seems a little alienating for CS types, and that might hamper adoption. All in all, Julia's pretty great, despite the minor quibbles I mentioned. I sure as hell wish I could use it for quant work instead of being stuck with the vastly inferior Python.