If you're serious about this moving forward, I very strongly suggest renaming it. PHP.reboot is a very hostile, aggressive name that is clearly trying to steal thunder. Call it a reboot of PHP informally, playfully base the name off of PHP somehow, but don't outright call your language "PHP.something that Google won't correctly parse as part of the same word so the search will still pull up nothing but PHP results". In addition to the hostile nature of the name, being effectively Google-blacklisted isn't a great way to start.
Also, admittedly off of just a glance, beware the specialized syntax sinkhole. Can I easily take two XML snippets and compose them together somehow? Can I easily take two SQL snippets and compose them together? A lot of times these specialized syntaxes make for cute-looking demos but in practice work out worse than just using language constructs because they are so highly specialized you can't do anything with them but exactly the one use case the author had in mind. I'd submit there's a reason that basically no large-scale successful language has this sort of specialized syntax built into it, and you may want to ponder on those reasons until you understand them. It isn't because it's hard to write the grammar or anything implementation-related like that. (And I'm not saying don't do it. Personally, I think it's a solvable problem. Look to LINQ for what is probably the closest to date. I'm suggesting you try to spend some time understanding why the obvious solutions haven't worked before you go too far down what can be a language-killing rathole.)
Also, admittedly off of just a glance, beware the specialized syntax sinkhole. Can I easily take two XML snippets and compose them together somehow? Can I easily take two SQL snippets and compose them together? A lot of times these specialized syntaxes make for cute-looking demos but in practice work out worse than just using language constructs because they are so highly specialized you can't do anything with them but exactly the one use case the author had in mind. I'd submit there's a reason that basically no large-scale successful language has this sort of specialized syntax built into it, and you may want to ponder on those reasons until you understand them. It isn't because it's hard to write the grammar or anything implementation-related like that. (And I'm not saying don't do it. Personally, I think it's a solvable problem. Look to LINQ for what is probably the closest to date. I'm suggesting you try to spend some time understanding why the obvious solutions haven't worked before you go too far down what can be a language-killing rathole.)