zlacker

>>Fascin+(OP)
What I really want to see from a "*-programming-language" post on HN is _why_. Why Lily?

>>onesev+fEb
The README on gitlab at least has a sentence or two on that: https://gitlab.com/FascinatedBox/lily

> An interpreted language with a focus on expressiveness and type safety

Personally I think typed scripting languages could be the future. They should support AOT compilation where necessary.

>>andyfe+bGb
Why do you think that's the future?

Isn't a waste to essentially reinterpret an entire program that may be run 5000 times a day?

AOT compilation, how is that different than make && run?

At some point, you have a compiled language, if it's quick to compile, you're doing the AOT yourself, the scripting is an illusion. Pun intended.