> I did, and it's bad form to suggest otherwise. If you say so. But... I said I think the features are good and you ask "why?" I could relist the features, b

> I did, and it's bad form to suggest otherwise. If you say so. But... I said I think the features are good and you ask "why?" I could relist the features, but that's a waste of time. As I said, I think the combination is a good combination. In a world where people try to encode loops in YAML or JSON, even small improvements are better and Dhall is a large improvement. > I was asking about your personal opinion, since you said it was great but didn't give any info as to why. I don't really get what you're asking. I said I think the combination of features is good. I don't need to describe the features. The reason I like them is probably related to neurochemistry? Are you asking for a deep dive on how Dhall compares to alternatives?