Stages of denial in encountering K
Look, I don&#x27;t hate K. It&#x27;s probably a pretty good language for the task it seems to have been designed for, which appears to be numerical computing. Being able to fit an entire code on a screen is an interesting concept; while I&#x27;m not completely convinced it should be a goal in and of itself it&#x27;s certainly something I can&#x27;t rule out as a possible productivity booster.<p>However, I still find it problematic, and it&#x27;s not really about the language itself: it&#x27;s more about how it&#x27;s promoted in the article, by the people in this thread, and in general. Specifically, the claims it&#x27;s perfectly readable, and anyone who says anything otherwise is either stupid, lying, or too poor to understand it are not useful. (Yes, you know who you are for that last one. You&#x27;re not helping your case.) The fact of the matter is that most programmers are used to ALGOL-esque syntax, and there is significant value in being able to lift concepts and interoperate between those languages at a superficial level. Every &quot;inspired&quot; languages hits these issues, depending on how &quot;strange&quot; it is: Objective-C is ugly, Lisp is alien, and on the far end APL derivatives are simply labelled as unreadable. That doesn&#x27;t mean they&#x27;re bad languages, but to those promoting it: drop the attitude, and understand why we have reservations. Your language isn&#x27;t the &quot;true&quot; way to program, that only the chosen elect can understand and lecture us on. Don&#x27;t ignore or gloss over languages that have similar features to yours. We want to hear what the interesting things are that you can do in the language, actual guidance for how we can adapt to the language (not: &quot;one-letter identifiers are just what we do; deal with it&quot;). Thanks.