Agreed. I don’t mind dynamic typing at all, particularly when facilities exist to establish contracts around what the data you’re passing around looks like. But I don’t think this is a brilliant solution to Python’s problems. Python has issues, don’t get me wrong, but it’s a very very mature language without a lot of WTF moments. On the flip side, a brand new language with this level of freedom means you really need to sit down and grok everything from the inventors perspective before you can be proficient. You need to absorb the entire language for it to work. Meanwhile, and I’m hesitant to beat this drum, a lisp like Clojure is not at all confusing or unclear. The syntax might be hard to grok initially, and the short function names or departure to literal functional programming might throw you off, but after that you realize the air is crisp. The language and stdlib are small and relatively old for a reason - the ecosystem fosters this. You can do and build anything without fuss. It’s wonderful.
This language isn't an attempt to solve Python's problems. At best it's an attempt to get around some minor speed bumps I personally experience when writing short Python scripts. I did not create this language with the expectation or hope that even a single other person in the world would want to learn it, much less become proficient. Clojure is a great language! It's just that I, personally, need more mental effort to translate thoughts to code using prefix notation and other aspects of Lisp syntax, and decided that reducing that kind of mental effort for myself was a goal of this language.
