> It *isn't* "putting every possible feature into every language." > Did I ever advocate that?
Yes. When you say "X is a useful feature, therefore we should put it into language Y", you are indeed implicitly advocating that. Because if that were *not* the case, then saying that X is *useful* says nothing whatever about whether it should be put into Y: there will be dozens, if not hundreds, of useful feature that will not be in Y. > Am I making syntax more complicated? No. I am if anything > suggesting making it simpler by removing arbitrary rules that only > complicated situation. Am I making compiler more complicated? No, > the code to do this was already written (just with different numbers), > and by doing what I say the compiler could actually be simplified > in some ways. You are making the *language* more complicated because you cannot look at each feature in isolation, but rather must look at how they interact with the other features of the language, among other issues. As I said, please study language design concepts before continuing this discussion.
