It's still pretty early, possibly buggy, and almost certain to get breaking changes without warning.
My original thought was to combine Lisp syntax and structural macros with C semantics and see how much extra abstraction that would provide, but variants of that idea have been tried before. They may have been compelling at a certain point in time, but I think a new systems programming language in 2026 should offer more, so it does.
Some features include: strong typing, protocols (similar to Clojure or Rust traits), non-nullable references, error values, bound error handlers (a bit like Common Lisp), optional lexical lifetimes, namespaces, and no mandatory runtime overhead relative to C.
It's self-hosted, which I've noticed several new systems programming languages announced recently are not.
It's still pretty early, possibly buggy, and almost certain to get breaking changes without warning.
My original thought was to combine Lisp syntax and structural macros with C semantics and see how much extra abstraction that would provide, but variants of that idea have been tried before. They may have been compelling at a certain point in time, but I think a new systems programming language in 2026 should offer more, so it does.
Some features include: strong typing, protocols (similar to Clojure or Rust traits), non-nullable references, error values, bound error handlers (a bit like Common Lisp), optional lexical lifetimes, namespaces, and no mandatory runtime overhead relative to C.
It's self-hosted, which I've noticed several new systems programming languages announced recently are not.