4 ms·
I admit that I also automatically lose a bit of interest if I see "familiar C-like (algol-like) syntax" as a supposed feature in a new programming language, the
by jbotz 6y ago
I admit that I also automatically lose a bit of interest if I see "familiar C-like (algol-like) syntax" as a supposed feature in a new programming language, there is also no point in being original just for originality's sake, and the space of possible syntaxes for programming languages has been pretty well explored. But in terms of semantics this really doesn't look much like an "Algol clone" at all, rather it seems to want to explore the conceptual space between imperative and functional languages where Rust has been breaking genuine new ground, and which clearly has more room for experimentation.
- rienbdj 6y agoHaving spent time with languages that use c syntax and ones with whitespace based syntax, I much prefer the latter. I think c syntax is seen as plus not because it is better, but because it is familiar to more people. See also ReasonML
- spijdar 6y agoJust for a dissenting opinion, I use both types of scope syntax on a regular basis and prefer the Algol-ish one. I personally find it easier to reason about where code blocks begin/end when they're explicitly marked. Makes moving code around easier, too. Note that most of my problems could be fixed with enough tooling/editor plugins/IDE magic, I just don't use them.