**spip:** _To my knowledge, OCaml already has this feature to offer different 
syntaxes to the users, varying from enhanced OCaml to Scheme/List or even user 
defined._

Yes, but it has always created lots of pain points for tooling. More recently, 
OCaml has been using towards using PPX rewriters instead, which work with 
annotations following a fixed syntax.

**Libman:** _Lots of people who previously skipped Nim because they're allergic 
to the indentation syntax would suddenly jump on board._

I'm very doubtful of that. Syntax is something that forum warriors like to 
fight over (see [Wadler's Law](https://wiki.haskell.org/Wadler's_Law)), but 
there's little evidence that it's a major driver for language adoption, unless 
ithe syntax is a BF-level of awful. Language adoption tends to be driven more 
by the language's ecosystem and critical mass (number of contributors, number 
of quality contributors, quality of tooling, depth and breadth of libraries). 
In the end, what matters is the ability to get work done.

Reply via email to