What is "Open Language"?

[Monte Goulding]

> On 25 Oct 2015, at 9:05 am, Geoff Canyon <gcanyon at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> The beauty of open language (in my dreams, perhaps not the spec) would be
> that:
> 
> 1. No one would have to dig into the engine to implement something like
> this.
> 2. You could release your "counter" version, I could release my "index"
> version, and the community would decide which they prefer and go with that.
> (or both).
> 3. And neither 1 nor 2 precludes something like this achieving critical
> mass such that the engine maintainers decide to put it in the engine
> directly.

OK, well we can let Mark Waddingham comment on whether I’m right in that control structures are unlikely targets for open language or not. It seems quite unlikely to me as it’s significantly more complicated than commands. I’m not saying it’s not possible the ROI would be terrible. As in almost 0 return for a reasonably heavy investment…