I think it's difficult to read "the one programming language that's close to being flawless", without interpreting it as being someone's opinion. Reading the a

I think it's difficult to read "the one programming language that's close to being flawless", without interpreting it as being someone's opinion. Reading the article though, I'd say a good objective argument is made that Fexl is "flawless", insofar as it being the "thinnest possible functional programming layer on top of C." Whether that's useful or good is another matter.