Cwerg VS kesh

Perhaps these have already been dealt with and I'm missing critical information. If so, my apologies. Great work, in any case.

[1] https://github.com/robertmuth/Cwerg/tree/master/FrontEnd#dis...

Cwerg has backend that can be used as JIT and is written with readability in mind. Additional documentation can be found here: https://github.com/robertmuth/Cwerg/tree/master/Docs

I defined a basic ISA-like IR for Cwerg. It has unlimited registers and no constraints on immediates.

entire compiler front end ast nodes

I was also going down the path of bike shedding concrete syntax for my language Cwerg before pulling the plug on that effort and just using s-exprs. I managed to make the s-expr quite succinct by carefully choosing the order of arguments so I can omit optional ones. Also very helpful was to use square brackets for list, e.g. (call fun-name [arg1 arg2]). This simplifies parsing a little bit and is easier on the eye. Here are some Code Examples

I am iterating over the languages features for Cwerg's Frontend which aims to be a low level language with about the complexity of C but with some of the comforts of modern languages. I am especially happy with the choice of adding sum types. Relative to C the current feature set looks like this: Removed: * arrays decay to pointers * bitfields * separate compilation (more of a backend issue) * pre-processor * varargs * implcit type conversions * (untagged) unions * ++/-- * comma operator * implicitly nullable pointers * goto

I have something similar in kesh, where : is the assignment operator and the type/signature may be "assigned" before the value:

I'm not OP, in case you thought that :) kesh lives here. I tried incorporating some of the ideas discussed here, but posponed it to a later language, which I'm still thinking about.

This is a great idea that I've adopted for my PL. I took it a step further and also allow extensions of the core language to be specified, including profiles.

My (non-existing) language kesh, designed to compile to TypeScript, has expression blocks. That was one of my first decisions.

Still no work on a compiler, but more work on the documentation of kesh.

I'm working on kesh, but it's only at the design stage. I have tried to make it simple yet powerful, so I thought I'd mention it even though you can't use it.

I tried to distill down the most essential features of TS/JS (functional, prototypal) and then come up with new syntax and semantics that was minimal, orthogonal and hopefully easy to learn and use. The result is kesh and na.

I like the way you think. I had the same goal with kesh. A minimal syntax is easier on the eye and lets you focus on the actual code.

I'm only at the drawing board stage of kesh, a simple little PL that one day might possibly transpile to TypeScript. Not a single line of compiler code has been written so far, it's still all about syntax design and exploring ideas. kesh is mostly a pastime activity and something I can ponder over when I'm bored or can't sleep (which may be the reason I can't sleep).