Little languages are the future of programming
People have been making this argument since the 80s and possibly even earlier. My experience is often the opposite. Little languages are usually far, far harder than (mis-)using "big" languages for small tasks.<p>The problem is that your DSL has to be understood by other people, including future you. Programming tasks are vast, combinatorially explosive state spaces full of weird potential interactions between features. Once you get above the complexity and universal familiarity of say, arithmetic, it's difficult for others to understand what's going on just by looking at 1-2 live examples. You have to heavily invest in proper docs and tooling (if your language doesn't provide it for free). By the time you've completed that your "little language" usually isn't such a little effort anymore.<p>If you don't, you've just made the next CMake. Congrats you monster.