> Hare instead aims to distill the as-of-this-decade state of the art in proven systems programming language design idioms to produce what we believe is the mos

> Hare instead aims to distill the as-of-this-decade state of the art in proven systems programming language design idioms to produce what we believe is the most robust language design right now. This quote could really use a secondary blog post outlining why they believe this is true relative to other languages. Putting aside where it stands on a relative basis, there are several decisions that they make that I personally think are directly in opposition to the absolute goal of robust program design. One specific example is that Hare supports global variables which is pretty hard for me to accept in a greenfield language. If they want to last 100 years, I would suggest that they go far smaller than they have. It is clear that they could self-host the Hare compiler with a much smaller subset of features than are in the language spec. That smaller Hare would be much closer to the true essence of Hare and would make it much more likely that they would create something capable of enduring for 100 years. It's a great goal but I think they have a lot of work to do if they have hope of achieving it.