qu1j0t3

Yeah basically true; it's described as "neutral" but it absolutely is not.

I have to admit, though, the New Haas revival is so amazingly good that it makes me want to like Helvetica.

1) Overexposure.

Same problem that Georgia has: Otherwise a very serviceable Matthew Carter design.

2) It's a screen font.

In print and display applications, it really does look gross.

Source: A Friendly neighbourhood typographer

I'd upvote this twice if I could.

It is a great strength of the popular subset of SQL that it is _not_ Turing complete.

It's not just you: Its typography and design is quite unsuitable to reading. The lines are too long, there is not enough leading, the typeface is badly chosen, and the black blocks everywhere are unpleasant and off putting.

"since the result will be not as performant as what they can do with C" -- This isn't the main reason, but it's also not really true. Paradigm changes don't imply "less performance". To the extent programmers believe, herd-like, "C is fast therefore my program will be fast", they are almost always wrong.

A lot of programmers resist learning anything new, for various reasons, but most charitably because they are never exposed to new ideas or paradigms.

I assume you're already au fait with Inform* family of languages...

Speaking of Fortran: please paste the equivalent JavaScript

The even more immediate objection is that a binary blob is the opposite of portable?!

don't confuse "module system" with "package manager"