EYG: A Programming Language for Humans

prologic

Functional programming paradigms? Matching? Complex syntax? Sorry but either I've missed the point, or you've lost me. If we're trying to create tools for non-Developers to build software, this isn't it. You can pretty much already just ask Claude/Codex/whatever and it'll build you a thing™ and it'll probably work. You don't even need to read the code.

invalidOrTaken

Interesting stuff. I do like the taxonomy of "computer work", where it's one part logic cognition, and one part ticky-tack details.

desireco42

Ha, very interesting. I just started using Gleam last week or so... I knew about it and loved Elm back in the day. Anyhow, will enjoy discovering EYG as well.

ctkqiang96

interesting......

saghm

> Sympathy for the machine only exists in developers. They will happily explain why integer overflows need to happen. The average human response to integer overflows is “WTF, that’s not how numbers work”. We have BigInt and 99% of the time the WTF response is the correct one. Forget sympathy for the machine; the real reason we need programming languages that prevent issues because we should have sympathy for the poor humans who are incapable of reasoning about anything but the simplest code without hitting the limits of their hardware. I'd argue that for virtually all humans (whether developers or otherwise), the brain is like the world's worst runtime for code imaginable. The maximum memory is absurdly low (how many variables can you really remember at once?) and prone to corruption that makes C look like a heaven-sent solution to undefined behavior (how many parents of multiple children do you know who never accidentally call kids the wrong name? my average length between calling one of my cats by the name of the other is like, a day at most), and the speed is laughable (time for a single division operation is on the order of entire seconds ). The widest integers in the world will not stop us from writing buggy code, and I think we have bigger fish to fry than BigInts

veqq

EYG's structure editor is amazing, not letting you create syntactically invalid code etc.

Panzerschrek

I generally don't think it's a good idea to develop a language for non-developers. It was tried before multiple times and the end goal has not been achieved. Sooner or later one realizes, that professional developers are still necessary, even for languages initially designed for "normies". But such a language is typically not good enough for them, it lacks necessary abstractions, flexibility, performance or something else. We have a lot of examples for this, like COBOL, SQL, Visual Basic.

gulugawa

Good luck. I look forward to hearing about future progress. I strongly agree with the approach of making programming more accessible with a simple, deterministic feature set.

teo_zero

I thought "makers" all used Python. What's the friction that EYG is supposed to remove?