Regardless of how great the stuff in the repo is (I'll check it out)... this is amazing:
"it's like c++ that went away to train with the league of shadows and came back 15 years later and became batman"
"it's like c++ that went away to train with the league of shadows and came back 15 years later and became batman"
The repo description literally says two things: Circle is a C++ automation language, and Circle trained with the League of Shadows. The rest requires clicks.
That's a terrible way to drive adoption for something that obviously was difficult to build. Sometimes being earnest and straightforward is the best way to break down skepticism, not by using meaningless hipster taglines.
How hard is it to write a one-sentence explanation of what a project is that doesn't involve ninjas?
"Circle is a compiler that extends C++17 for new introspection, reflection and compile-time execution. An integrated interpreter allows the developer to execute any function during source translation. Compile-time flavors of control flow statements assist in generating software programmatically. The configuration-oriented programming paradigm captures some of the conveniences of dynamic languages in a statically-typed environment, helping separate a programmer's high-level goals from the low-level code and allowing teams to more effectively reason about their software."
While I appreciate your qualm, respectfully I think that no matter how it were introduced, someone would've quibbled. "You should be straightforward", "you should be more detailed", "you should have more ninjas". There's no win. The solution is to hope the readers you care about will be adventurous enough to make two clicks.