What you have so far IS an impressive, audacious, idea. You can probably tell by the amount of attention you have gotten for it already. False humility is a kind of arrogance too, you know. Honest humility takes more work. Any time anyone starts talking about writing a new language, either they have not thought through all the challenges that would have to be met, like a boy trying to build a rocket to the moon using fireworks, or they are trying to do something impressive. Which are you?
I kinda like Clojure, but I don't think it would occur to me to default to it every time someone mentions the word 'lisp'. Not because it's not an adequate language, but there are downsides to using it for some jobs.
I've used Clojure before "for fun" and I like it - it's not a problem with the language per-se. Rather it's more a case of wanting Logos to be small, simple and "fit" the drogulus. Does this make sense?
I agree with you about developing new languages. That's why I chose to re-implement a Lisp: I don't want to invent a new language. However, I do want a language that meets my need for "fit", simplicity, portability and compactness (I'd like my kids to be able to understand and program in Logos). To use a musical analogy, Logos is a re-arrangement an old classic (Lisp) for different ensembles. ;-)
This is a work in progress and I need to push ideas in to code and get feedback as soon as possible. Only then will you be able to tell if I'm playing with fireworks or doing something impressive. Furthermore, while I have a very clear idea of what needs doing, I don't think this is a one-person job. That's why the biggest challenge for me right now is to transition the drogulus from a one person playtime project hacked together during a daily 40 minute commute in to London in to a functioning multi-person project with an active community of users.
Now, that would be impressive!
As always, I'm happy to answer questions and welcome constructive comment, critique and feedback.
N.