I got mixed feelings about the language at first sight. I guess my mammalian brain recognizes languages based on the particular combination of the following naming decisions.
* func, function, fun, defun fu, funct
* CamelCase vs snake_case
* whitespace, semicolon or comma usage
* var, int/integer/uint64/Integer/
* choice of (), {}, [] or better (){a[]}
* import/include/require, class/class, override, self vs this, new vs Class()
PS: next time you design a new language just make a random unique combination of the above.
> PS: next time you design a new language just make a random unique combination of the above.
That's my impression whenever I see a new programming language too. Why would someone switch to your language if the syntax is just the same boring old syntax they've been using in another language?
Since I'm being downvoted... please excuse my poor attempt at sarcasm.
What I'm saying is that I sometimes get the impression that language designers randomly change up syntax just to make their language look different, and thus superficially more appealing to users. Just like any other kind of product.
* func, function, fun, defun fu, funct
* CamelCase vs snake_case
* whitespace, semicolon or comma usage
* var, int/integer/uint64/Integer/
* choice of (), {}, [] or better (){a[]}
* import/include/require, class/class, override, self vs this, new vs Class()
PS: next time you design a new language just make a random unique combination of the above.