zerkten 3 days ago

Does this start up quickly on the first execution? IronPython and other languages have problems with JIT resulting in minor delays to execution which are frustrating for quick scripts. There was a change in IronPython to interpret and not JIT on the first run to avoid this delay. Anything you use to remove JIT delays for quick scripts will increase the likelihood of adoption. Running JIT on repeat runs is a beneficial feature so you don't want to kill it entirely.

As others have stated, the use of semicolons while stating this is "like Python" is weird. Use language which avoids the direct Python comparison. It seems like your language is intended to be succinct. Just state that because it'll avoid negative reactions. I'm a C# and Python dev, so I'd rather you avoided this in-between state.

Killing semicolons and braces to embrace indentation would be my preference for a scripting language that is intended to appeal to my Python-side. If the intention is to appeal purely to C# devs, then don't mention Python at all because they often jump to "indentation, ugh" without considering your language.

1
sinisterMage 3 days ago

Thanks for the thoughtful feedback — you raised a few great points I hadn’t fully considered.

You're absolutely right about JIT startup time. Currently, W++ doesn't do any caching or ahead-of-time work, so there’s a delay on the first run. I’ll explore ways to keep it snappy for quick scripts — maybe a pure interpreter fallback for single-run use cases would help.

Also appreciate the insight on the Python comparison. That “in-between state” you described is exactly where I’m at — trying to blend Python’s simplicity with .NET’s power. But you’re right, the messaging could be cleaner. I’ll adjust the README to better reflect that W++ is its own thing and not a direct clone or pitch to Python devs.

This kind of comment is gold, seriously. Thanks for taking the time.