For me, I think it’s that most common-language things that I happen to look at are 500-line+ with non-obvious short names (initialisms? might be an issue with low-level). Some of it might be down to optimization or language features/requirements, or not using libraries. Though I also don’t hate whitespace so it may just be my brain.
The other side of the coin is that interpreted languages (being more readable) are slower(+single-threaded) and have other limitations/issues. I have some hope that Python’s update with JIT and no-GIL may change that, but integrating it into other tools is still an issue so I haven’t looked into it.
The one language that has clicked for me is Nim-lang (compiles-to-C, interop). I haven’t done enough real projects, but I like the syntactic sugar and UFCS. Not sure if that’s the best way to say it, but it’s like the options that exist can be used to make code more concise. Something that seems small like how you can write conditions or loops can make a big difference.
For me, I think it’s that most common-language things that I happen to look at are 500-line+ with non-obvious short names (initialisms? might be an issue with low-level). Some of it might be down to optimization or language features/requirements, or not using libraries. Though I also don’t hate whitespace so it may just be my brain.
The other side of the coin is that interpreted languages (being more readable) are slower(+single-threaded) and have other limitations/issues. I have some hope that Python’s update with JIT and no-GIL may change that, but integrating it into other tools is still an issue so I haven’t looked into it.
The one language that has clicked for me is Nim-lang (compiles-to-C, interop). I haven’t done enough real projects, but I like the syntactic sugar and UFCS. Not sure if that’s the best way to say it, but it’s like the options that exist can be used to make code more concise. Something that seems small like how you can write conditions or loops can make a big difference.