Better branding of -betterC

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

On Saturday, 31 October 2020 at 16:22:32 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> On Saturday, 31 October 2020 at 01:57:19 UTC, Walter Bright 
> wrote:
>> On 10/29/2020 5:48 AM, Abdulhaq wrote:
>>> I'm pretty sure that Jai is not mimicking D, also I doubt 
>>> that Zig is either.
>>
>> D popularized CTFE, and other languages followed suit, 
>> including Jai.
>
> Sorry but that flag belongs to Lisp and Dylan macros,

If CTFE means that you use the regular language then I guess 
dynamic languages would be the first, but then you may not have a 
clear separation between compilation and execution either. Of 
course there are many languages that do some of it, e.g. flexible 
type systems with generic unification/logic programming.

Why most language designers don't go all the way with the full 
language probably has a lot to do with:

1. debugging is difficult
2. compilation may not terminate
3. compilation will be slower
4. it is seen as an implementation optimization and not a 
language feature

But then again, computers are faster, have more memory and can 
spend more resources on static analysis so CTFE is perhaps 
primarly a consequence of technology... e.g. time.