It's worth reiterating the point of my initial comment (which I admit I may not have conveyed well). I never said "syntax doesn't matter", because that's not my

It's worth reiterating the point of my initial comment (which I admit I may not have conveyed well). I never said "syntax doesn't matter", because that's not my point. My point is that it's almost never worth arguing about. Just pick something (or accept what already exists) and move on. Language designers (and you) have more worthwhile things to do. My issue is with unproductive, endless debates about syntax minutiae like the original post. Syntax doesn't matter enough to be worth it, and such debates devolve into everyone shouting about their personal preferences anyway (see: many of these comments). > Do SQL without the SQL syntax I'm not sure what you're saying here. The syntax of SQL is completely arbitrary - I'm sure you could think of a completely different syntax that works just fine. Let me know if I'm missing something, but it seems extremely obvious to me that the biggest difference between C++ and SQL programs isn't how they look - it's how they behave. One wouldn't dream of replacing one with the other and that has nothing to do with their syntaxes. > go to the C++ community (for example) and tell them to change the syntax to lisp syntax and see how much it will succeed Obviously it'll fail - good. Even if lisp syntax was way better, they've gotten used to C++ syntax and have much more important things to spend their time on.