There were definitely these sort of leading concepts that changed a bit. For example, the concept of synchronisation became a bit more general than that somehow. With synchronisation, then this idea of formulation in different things. Which we did, but at some point, I think with the development of WRECK, instead of formulating it in many languages it became the creation of a language.
Well I found quite interesting that, in that short period of time, you also used many languages. Elm, Haskell, OCaml, Supercollider. That was interesting to see because, as you have seen from what I'm doing, I'm translating from all languages to this language.
Although for me these three languages they are really variations of one language. It's like: ok, I do need mutables, so I go OCaml. I need some more abstract monads, I go Haskell. Or, if I need to put it on internet I go Elm.
Also there is a certain feeling that the languages give you, no? And it's also something that you, David, can see in your work. You strive for purity in some way. And I also enjoy this about Rust. There is something in that feeling, like I'm really there, there is no big abstraction here. You know, I'm doing this stuff and I'm kind of touching it somehow. And then, like with Haskell, it is this huge thing. It kind of teaches me. It knows more than me somehow and, if I formulate correctly, then I will also understand something about programming, and about abstracting, and so on. But OCaml is different also. It's like nice abstractions but smaller and more handable. That's why we moved also to OCaml for WRECK. Because it was just too abstract the Haskell thing.