Match.jl VS kesh

I can only agree. Compared to other languages I find Python increasingly difficult to reason about, mainly due to its dynamicity. If the language complexity increases as well from now on I don't think I will use Python unless absolutely necessary.

Meanwhile, Julia supports pattern matching due to macros: https://github.com/kmsquire/Match.jl

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).