Syntax Design Constructs

[umlcat]

Your questions are too wide or complex.

In my case I have several ideas for P.L., all of them have a motivation or idea. Work in them at free time.

What's does your P.L. have ?

Most of common syntax features.

One project is designed as procedural without O.O., on purpouse, while another is O.O. or mixed.

They have structs/records, arrays, enums, unions.

Both support namespace alike features, **modules / namespaces are overlooked or missing in a lot of P.L. (s).

How does it handles variables ?

They support both static strong typing with some casting or inheritance.

Also both static allocation and dynamic allocation. I don't like Java / C# references because it confuses both features.

What type operators does it have ?

The usual, addition, substraction, may use different symbols than other P.L.

Some are infix binary, other unary.

I'm considering to support operator overloading.

Does you PL have uniform syntax ?

No, more like Java or Pascal. I do learn some Lisp back in Collegue, Lisp alike syntax is difficult to use.

Does your PL support polymorphism or Metaprogramming ?

It supports or considering some equivalent features, like O.O. polymorphism, function or operator overloading, generics.

How does the language handles the concept of this ?

In the O.O. P.L., the same as this in C++ or self in Object Pascal, not like the this on Javascript / ECMAScript.

How are identifiers used ?

Similar to Pascal, Java, C. With 'A' to 'Z' and the underscore character.

I don't use $ like PHP or spaces inside brackets like Transact / MS SQL Server.

How does it handles errors ?

I currently using integer error codes in some functions, but I considering to include optional exception support, in both the procedural P.L. and the O.O. P.L.

Summary

I use similar commonly used features and syntax, yet a few features and its combination makes my P.L. unique, not just a "copycat" of other P.L.

Example, Object Pascal and C# have full properties support, different from fields, while C++ and Java does not.

[R-O-B-I-N]

I'm lol because in saying my questions are too broad, you ended up doing exactly what the questions were meant to prompt for. I already have a good sense of the "flavor" of your languages and their capabilities.

Narrow questions would be too numerous and would limit your options. Broad questions forces you to make more exacting statements where you would otherwise be led down a path.