soc

Why would GitLab care!?

Where does this obnoxious use of "actually" come from, by the way?

Thank you for letting me know your thoughts!

Automatic semicolon inference has a very big language footprint, similar to the range syntax that the author disliked.

Maybe not "very big", but I agree with your point in principle.

The reason why I think it is worthwhile (compared to e. g. range syntax) is that we are paying for it anyway already:

Good error reporting hinges on parsing not strictly the language that's defined, but understanding the language that people actually write – and people forget ; all the time.

So from my POV I'm turning an error reporting step (that I'd have to implement anyway) into something more useful.

For this feature to be useful, it has to be at least powerful enough to replace format!

To be honest, if all the fancy formatting stuff requires a macro, so be it.

I just don't want to need macros for creating a list and so on.

I hope you both receive the help you obviously need, you two snowflakes.

Donating to that shell script collection of this weird right-wing millionaire guy from Ruby on Rails.

I wonder if there will be an equivalent AMD offering ...

Are they no longer funding them, or are they just not reporting it anymore?

Cal down you clown. People can decide to spend their own money in whatever way they see fit.

Framework CEO has been busy last year losing trust, to be honest.

It's layers and layers of indirections with no clear need and technical decisions that make things unnecessarily complex.

So your basically writing Regexes in a custom DSL in JavaScript, combined with custom hooks written in C, from which a megabytes-large native-code parser is generated.

The complexity of the solution does not fit the niche between dead-easy TextMate grammars and plugging into an LSP.

Don't misunderstand me, I wish there was something filling that niche, but TreeSitter 100% certainly isn't it.

Well done!

The point I’m trying to make is that this is a very incomplete article, as it doesn’t seem that much thought was put on the downsides.

I could mentioned additional points in favor for the same reason you mentioned your points against, but at some point one has to stop and decide whether any minor, additional points made would sway the overall verdict.

Many of the most popular languages have both modifiers and annotations:

I have a separate blog post in which I consider when "popularity" or "familiarity" should be considered when it comes to language design.

C doesn’t have both because it doesn’t even have annotations. Idk about C++, but it either doesn’t have annotations (like C)

Both C and C++ have annotations. They are called "attributes" in their language, as mentioned in the footnote linked from the blog post's first sentence.

People genuinely don’t believe this to be an issue. The closest is public static int main() for java.

If you look at Java-inspired languages like Scala or Kotlin, neither of them have public (made the default) nor static (replaced by companion objects).