Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please tell me you are not serious :)
They are not, and they're not helpful either. At least officially, the idea announced was that the language will be available (and open source) later in the summer. Hopefully this goes well, as the language makes some big promises that make it sound like vaporware, but at least we do have a playground accepting the syntax now.
I’m 100% serious; that’s a business model with no value in it, and they few vendors who have tried it in the past are all fading into obvilion.
Getting adoption of a language is hard enough as it is (see the slow uptake of say, kotlin despite large scale corporate backing) making it a pay-to-use is just a dead end.
How are you going to sustain the user growth for a paid product when better or equivalent free alternatives exist? How will you build an ecosystem when the core product is paid-to-use? If I’m paying to make something, I’m not giving it away for free. Not only that, it’s a proven failed business model see Borland for example. The few vendors that remain are for embedded devices.
There are so many thing wrong with the idea it’s hard to know where to even start enumerating them.
/shrug
> They are not, and they're not helpful either.
...but please, don’t try to put words in my mouth, that’s just offensive.
I am completely serious, and was in my previous comment too.