Do you expect people to hold up the so-called faux pas or Jimmy's absolutely hilarious fat redhead fetish that his coworkers will be giving him the stink-eye for a few months before everyone forgets about it?
Syntax-wise it looks a lot like Haskell to me, especially the pattern-matching, the variable declarations (with `::`), as well as the indent-based blocks.
This actually looks good. It's like a less-obtuse Haskell. At a glance the features seem to be just the right mix of functional programming paradigms and standard imperative programming.
My case is like this: I get no anxiety talking to people, I have nothing against talking to people, and I believe I can get my point across well enough and fluently when I need to get things done.
However, whenever there is a social gathering and such that I have to attend, my default, standard set of activities unless someone approaches me is to just look around look at my surroundings, get lost in my headspace while taking a walk around the place while tuning out others and greeting anyone who I happen to know. If I happen to be interested in having a conversation with someone, I will have it. But I'm simply not interested in people by default, or meeting people for the sake of it.
I have never spontaneously felt any inadequacy with myself when doing this. What inadequacies are there have almost exclusively have been pointed out to me by others, much in the same way the author does with Aditya here. I just don't ever feel a need to talk or force a conversation unless others (relatives and colleagues) are pressuring me to do so.
The mannerisms of the Author are what I've often heard from the management people in the companies that I've worked for and in some Linkedin posts. I'm not trying to deny at all that effective communication and networking has its benefits, but the way they talk, including the Author's article often makes me feel like they're masking an insurmountable amount of annoyance and vitriol for those who just don't want to talk. It's as if they will not accept anything other than the status quo of constant chatter and networking.
Linting, refactoring and testing all have obvious benifits for anyone who has done any small to medium sized project and has had to rewrite and debug some amount of code, even if they don't know the concepts by name. Even version contolling is ubiquitous in almost any entry-level programming job, even if it wasn't before.
Most people who have made a website with CSS before would at best change the font size, the line spacing and the font face and tweak it to a point that feels easily readable and call it a day. Introducing variable widths between the characters of the font, digraphs and so on feels like more like exercising artisanship that only the experts would see value in rather than solving a technical problem.
Perhaps advanced web design/typesetting is the main application of this and it has a chance of inducing a better subconscious effect on the viewer. Sort of how magazines and books were designed back in the day I suppose.
Sorry if I'm sounding harsh, but do people aside from hardcore typographists really care about this and similar font/text tweaking projects? I felt no noticeable difference in readability in either of the modes and for a second I even thought the before example is the "better" version they are advertising because it felt more streamlined in my eyes.
Maybe this might help people with dyslexia but don't proper dyslexia focused fonts and aids exist already?