I don't think C# and Python are particularly close to natural language. I also don't think making a language read more like English really makes it more readable. If that was true people wouldn't struggle with reading legalese.

▲

anonymous908213 3 days ago | parent [-]

You can absolutely write C# that reads close to natural language. I do so on a daily basis.

Legalese is a bit of a non-sequitur. Despite English legalese ostenisbly being written in English, it is specifically obfuscated, using terminology that is not encountered in everyday English so as to be more difficult for laymen to understand. In fact it is common for legalese to use English that is not English, that is, words that look like English words but have completely different definitions that are not in accord with how those words are used in regular communication.

▲

voidUpdate 2 days ago | parent [-]

I use a lot more brackets in C# than I would in natural language...

	▲	anonymous908213 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		And the original submission billed as "Compile English to Rust" uses a lot more ## and quotation marks than natural language. Perhaps we could establish an understanding that we are still talking about programming languages, not natural language, and that there is a scale of "further from natural language" and "closer to natural language", wherein decisions made about and within the programming language can move it along the scale while still being a programming language.