[mcluck]

Looks interesting but here's what I don't understand. So many programming languages do not show example code on the homepage. That's like if Mazda didn't show cars on their homepage. Sure, you won't really know what it's like to drive it without getting your hands dirty but at least let me see the trim.

[floodle]

Even worse, the "tutorial" is a challenge of sorts, where you have to guess at the right answer given hints.

[notreallyserio]

Sure, that's a problem, but once you've figured out the answers you can just skip them next time.

[ryukoposting]

Makes me want to skip the language entirely.

[davidclevenger]

I haven't laughed this hard in a long time

[Mathnerd314]

The "documentation" is also tutorial-style.

[toomanydoubts]

We need to go deeper.

[bidirectional]

How is an interactive tutorial bad?

[kazinator]

In the spirit of testing: Mazda doesn't show cars on their home page. Here is mazda.com:

   Forbidden

   You don't have permission to access / on this server.

You have to add www. to mazda.com before you can see any damn cars.

And it's just one car I see; some fat SUV that looks like it's about to give birth to a pair of sporty twins.

[coldtea]

>You have to add www. to mazda.com before you can see any damn cars.

Who said mazda.com is the homepage, and not www.mazda.com?

[LeoPanthera]

In the USA, Mazda is at mazdausa.com, not mazda.com. There are eight cars on the front page.

[toomanydoubts]

So, whats your point? Does that change anything?

[coldtea]

For starters, the first "test" was bogus: grantparent said "front page", but parent tried the naked domain (which Mazda doesn't intent to be the front page).

[kazinator]

> Mazda doesn't intent

Do you work for Mazda, or else how do you know? Is this intent published on the real site somewhere, which is what the user is trying to find in the first place when they try mazda.com?

Maybe this is just some webmaster that needs to have their ass fired.

Trying "mazda.com" for Mazda is the obvious thing for a user to do. I just tried half a dozen multinational corporations that are associated with well-known consumer brands, they all have a page at <name>.com or redirect to one. It is not in any way "bogus" to try that.

The mazda.com page doesn't even provide a clue as to where the expected site actually is; that's what is "bogus". For a second I was wondering whether Mazda actually own the domain, or is that someone squatting (yet using a Mazda logo favicon).

Not to have a page there which redirects the user to the real one, and just a permission error, comes across as astonishingly unprofessional, especially for a company of the proportions of Mazda. (If it was Uncle Bob's Pizza down the street, I might not think so as much.)

[coldtea]

>Do you work for Mazda, or else how do you know?

There's this thing called common sense. Either they have a broken "naked domain" homepage for months and they didn't notice, or their homepage is www.mazda.com.

>Trying "mazda.com" for Mazda is the obvious thing for a user to do.

OK, fine, whatever.

>Not to have a page there which redirects the user to the real one, and just a permission error, comes across as astonishingly unprofessional

Which is neither here, nor there, to the actual question of this subthread: whether they have cars on their homepage.

That they have the naked domain not redirect to www, doesn't mean their homepage is that and not the one they actually present, fill-in, and treat as such.

[LeoPanthera]

> Trying "mazda.com" for Mazda is the obvious thing for a user to do.

That used to be the case, but I would argue strongly that it is no longer. Now the obvious and normal thing to do is type "Mazda" into a search engine. In the USA, mazdausa.com is the top hit. (And Wikipedia is second.)

[lopatin]

It changes the number of cars on the front page from 1 to 8.

Edit: Darn, I actually only count 6 cars on mazdausa.com

[0xTJ]

I don't get your point. Plenty of sites have `www` (though most will forward to it from the non-`www` version. A company's homepage isn't defined as their first-level subdomain. On top of that, many companies have different homepages. Some are for their products, some are for their company.

[kazinator]

> I don't get your point.

You must be like paid not to get it or something?

The corporate and product sites you are talking about firstly (1) exist and (2) link to each other. "Hey, this is our corporate site; if you're looking for products, click here."

Can you find another company that has the same revenue figures as Mazda (multi-billion dollars), and that is a widely recognized consumer brand, which has a broken web page at their root domain that doesn't redirect or link to anything, or even greet the user in any way?

It's pretty weird.

[gibolt]

Must be an NFT that you don't own

[jaredsohn]

nissan.com doesn't show any cars. :)

[vjeux]

Great feedback! This is a big oversight.

[spicybright]

Do you have any example code that highlights the caching idea described on the main page?

[pharmakom]

Maybe a feature list tells you more than a code list might show? Often syntax is the less interesting thing.

[toomanydoubts]

I'm not sure. If we're talking about turing complete languages, aside from performace, you can get all kinds of features in all kinds of languages. It's actually a matter of how expressive, safe, idiomatic and well designed they are for everyday usage.

When discussing a language which is defined by caching values, we sure do want to see how that looks like in practice.

[viktorcode]

Just click "learn more" button and you'll see step by step examples of the language features.

A quick take on the front page can't possibly explain much about a language, maybe just a sample of syntax? I don't know why it would've been useful.

[alpaca128]

I can only speak for myself, but this kind of abstract listing of features is absolutely meaningless to me. Why would I want to use it instead of others, how do the unique features make a difference at solving a frequent problem? After reading the page I know Skip does something with caching, but I still have no clue what difference it actually makes in a program.

In my opinion a programming language landing page without code example is like a game's Steam store page without screenshots - it's cool to know it's a "fast-paced racing game" but that could apply to everything between Tux Racer and Gran Turismo.

TypeScript's website shows right at the top in a few lines how it makes an easy mistake in JS impossible. Zig's site has a nice example that gives you an idea of some added features, how it differs from C but still feels similar. Rust's website had an editable and runnable code snippet showing iterators and pattern matching (although for some reason they later replaced it with the phrase "blazingly fast" in the redesign).

[xigoi]

Look at Nim's front page: https://nim-lang.org/ It features several code samples showcasing many important language features.

[Mawr]

> Just click "learn more" button and you'll see step by step examples of the language features.

I got bored after about 5 pages, everything presented there is the same as in any other language. I want to see what differentiates this language from others, not what's the same.

That is what a landing page of any new language must accomplish - sell the reader on the power of your unique features as fast as possible.

[mshockwave]

what's worse, even if you click on "more info" it goes to a tutorial that teaches you from zero. But I'm more eager to know killer features in this language.

[ewittern]

In that regard, they are taking the language‘s name way too serious.