having functions would also open up the possibility of transpiling to, say, C, in a readable manner. (I could technically do this now, but it would just be a big main() function with a lot of labels and gotos.) but it would mean that the language would less directly map to assembly, which seems undesirable. i keep going back and forth (no pun intended) on this
Oct 8, 2026, 5:05 AM@aparrish omg has nobody made a programming language, or os kernel, or architecture, named "back" yet? to take advantage of that pun
thats right my handheld console's microcontroller runs back and forth
would the back language be described in backus naur form
@tkchia i would consider this for sure! though i don't really like the idea of adding annotations that are only relevant for certain backends, at least not this early in the design/implementation process :/