grok2

You should put this up on your site as a link to "Technical Details"! For anyone who knows networking stacks, this really clarifies the features/benefits and also shows there is some substance behind the protocol/stack. Otherwise, like everyone else pointed out, the web-site itself doesn't provide a clue as to why one would use this.

Maybe the consciousness of a baby is different from that of an adult and the baby has barely any consciousness? I guess everything depends on what you define as "consciousness".

But I think the point being made is that eating the free-lunch makes you "weak" (weakens your resolve) on your journey towards your Ithaca -- illustrating exactly the point being made about being a "lotus-eater".

It would be useful if the web-site had a real case-study where they show all the features in action. Right now it looks like vaporware -- like one of those sites people put up to see if there is interest in an idea.

And perhaps stuff like this should have on-site capability for enterprises that don't use github, gitlab and such?

I am not sure why a lot of the comments here are very negative. At least for me this was a well-written post that was very introspective and made me think about my own choices and if I was a lotus-eater or a pursuer of Ithaca!

I think part of the thing that people complain as complexity is the fact that there is too much choice in the web world and no one framework/tool/language is dominant and clearly better than the rest.

I picked the same and use the menu to build, but I don't have VisualStudio, so perhaps the sample didn't really build. Then I was clicking around the menu and chose the Single-Step option on the menu (F11? F10?) when the IDE crashed.

What GUI toolkit is used for the IDE? Is the IDE multi-platform? I tried the Windows application and it had complaints about Visual Studio not being found when building the sample app. What's the dependence on Visual Studio about? Also the IDE died in a unrecoverable way when trying to do a single-step on the first sample application.

See the answer nabla9 gave. There is no real truth and the idea really is to just meditate and not worry about the truth or the nature of truth. So there is no point in the questions themselves.

Yeah, I didn't notice that. If that is the case, then perhaps there is no purpose in creating a new language. Perhaps the only benefit to creating the new language could be that it might be a little easier to mechanically convert from the existing VimScript to the new style VimScript they are thinking of.

So you can use all the zillions of existing extensions/scripts, it really only makes sense to rewrite using VimScript as the scripting language to make it faster. Then you have a built in user base.

It seems like the gist is that the responsibility is on the application to be architect-ed (perhaps using one of the various libraries/strategies) to handle flow-control/back-pressure. The language itself doesn't directly help.

How do actor model languages (like ponylang) handle this? It seems like not having back-pressure support would be a fundamental issue with the language.