3 ms·

The syntax looks well optimized for human editing. The example seems like it would be machine generated though. I hope the syntax learns from SQL, and allows

• MayeulC 6y ago
  The way I'd do it, would be to store an intermediate representation, and have multiple front-ends with different syntaxes. Have the editable text be generated from the IR. This would be a huge plus, as it would not require the editor to know English keywords. Most keywords could be translated into the contributor's native language, lowering the barrier for editing. It would also allow the syntax to be changed over time, or provide multiple different syntax paradigms, a bit like wikipedia's code vs visual editors. Of course, comments are an issue, but hopefully, this is as close to "self-commenting" code as it gets.
• ganafagol 6y ago
  That's the beauty here. It's not the syntax. It's just a syntax to express the abstract thing. Saying this syntax is an issue is like saying "I don't like binary trees because their syntax is so weird". One particular syntax may be weird, but the syntax is only specific to one specific representation. Everybody will be free to choose any representation they like, as long as it can somewhat automatically be translated back into the abstract thing that this project is aiming to produce and maintain.