[Rochus]

Actually, I only use original Oberon when I'm migrating the old Oberon systems. My interest lies in finding out how I would have to modify original Oberon to be as productive as I am used to with e.g. C++, but still adhering to the goal of simplicity. My version, which I call Oberon+ (and to which Luon is quite similar, whereas Luon is even simpler), goes in this direction.

Actually an "edge over more currently popular languages" from my humble point of view is the goal and maintenance of simplicity. The term is subjective, but if you look at many of today's completely overloaded languages, it is intuitive to understand.

[ralphc]

I have to ask, "why?" in the spirit of if you're smart enough to write an Oberon on top of Lua and then use that to write a Smalltalk VM then you're certainly smart enough to get around a complicated language and tolerate a lack of some simplicity.

[Rochus]

Probably a similar reason why equations are simplified in mathematics. If something is not represented or implemented as simply as possible, there is obviously overhead or redundancy. In the sense of the lean philosophy, that would be waste.

Simple solutions are also less prone to errors and easier to modify and expand. This reduces the probability of errors and makes it easier to maintain and update the system.

Simplicity makes systems (and programming languages) easier for users to understand and use. This leads to greater user-friendliness and reduces the learning curve, resulting in a more positive user experience and, in turn, a lower error rate.

I'm sure there are many more reasons (apart from the obvious proof by authority, which is based on the statements of, for example, Einstein or Wirth).