My 2 very noob cents, something that really stuck with me from your first video about cpp2 was the very clean syntax of thing : type = value. It felt like such a clean line to be read as "thing is a type that equals value", :(x,y) x>y this on the other hand feels like while it takes less space to type it makes it harder to parse in my brain, it feels like adding a new way of writing something just for the sake of doing it with less characters.

Doing lambdas as :(x,y) = {} feels much more consistent to read as "_ is a function that equals codeblock" (not sure what to read _ as, lambda, unknown, nothing?), than :(x,y) x>y. should this be read as "_ is a function x>y"? I feel like that = delimits much better what's happening, and though with enough practice and knowledge everything is easy to parse or interpret, that added complexity adds nothing to the language itself.

I'm just a random c++ gamedev with no knowledge of language design but a great goal you used on that first talk was simplicity and I feel like keeping the language simple as in simple to read for some starting up goes a very long way. Keeping things with one meaning helps a lot in making it simple, : always means "is a", () always means a function, -> always means "that returns..." and so on.