And I don't understand the knee-jerk reaction against being labelled software-conservative. Yegge's overarching message, where conservatism is employed to mitig

And I don't understand the knee-jerk reaction against being labelled software-conservative. Yegge's overarching message, where conservatism is employed to mitigate engineering risk, is a Good Thing. Also, Yegge's specific examples of liberal features are astonishingly bad. Half of the liberal features illustrate the worst aspects of language (non-)design. Automatic type conversion, stringification, semantic nulls? Sounds exactly like PHP and Javascript. The other half of the liberal features are either inconsequential, or actually significant to conservative languages. Bitstrings, function overloading by arity, a global namespace, convention over configuration? Sounds like Erlang/OTP. Preprocessing and DSLs? Try ML (Meta Language), not to mention macros in Lisp-likes.