> If you try to use it like your favorite functional/procedural/OO programming language, you will only get frustrated.
For me personally, the sentence could be shortened to just: "If you try to use it, you will only get frustrated."
For me personally, the sentence could be shortened to just: "If you try to use it, you will only get frustrated."
> The same baseless accusations of “unreadable”, “write-only” and “impossible to learn” are leveled at all Iversonian languages, k included.
I argue that these accusations are far from baseless. Sure, I can not cite a study, but neither does he. So I assume it's word against word.
> Readability is a property of the reader, not the language.
In my view this is an oversimplification. Having a steep learning curve clearly prevents adoption. The language design actively contributes to the problem. I'm just not sure on why. Could it be that the authors of these languages do not _want_ them to be used by others?