> I never cared for Dijkstra's arguments on the matter.

It resonates with me, as does little-endian. There are evergreen arguments about both of these, but they stand out to me as two of the few places where I appear to be in sync with the majority.

> Pascal is using 1-ord, Fortran, R, Mathematica. If anything, it seems there's a longer tradition of 1-ord in scientific computing.

Actually, Pascal let you define the starting point, but, historically, COBOL (business) and FORTRAN started at one, and these days, it's Matlab (engineering), as well as R, Mathematica, and Julia. But, really, my point was that Julia is hyped to take over from Python, and it seems if that's the focus, then you should think long and hard about what features of Python to change, and, well, obviously that wasn't really the direction they came from.

> semantics like that, without unnecessarily sacrificing performance—I don't think they get enough credit for that from programming guys.

It's good work, but at the same time, a bit overblown IMO. For example, the creators claim homoiconicity, but that stretches the definition of that word to where Python would be homoiconic as well, and it's obviously not.

As far as the multiple dispatch goes, that's actually not that difficult of a puzzle piece when you are compiling ahead of time with unboxed objects.