Also building a language with AI.

It's decent at design and implementation, but strangely terrible at language consistency - and expectedly architecture.

Steering it on language consistency is easy. Steering it on architecture has required me to learn a lot more about compilers than I wanted to do for this project (since that's a lot more than I wanted to take on for something that was supposed to be a "fun" "side" project).

I have a similar problem.

I'm not sure about architecture. When I first implemented the slot system in my language, I designed it around that implementation, and in the end, the architecture suffered. There were quite a few cases where consistency was simply unavoidable.

It's not easy to create a completely new architecture with something that doesn't exist in existing languages. Consistency doesn't come together as easily as you'd think.

In that sense, I really admire the people who first introduced something new.

When I started implementing it, I focused on one killer feature and just went for it—with the feeling that if this succeeds, my language will succeed. But once I started building around it, it turned out to be very different from other compiler architectures.

With CRUD or other well-established domains, it's easier to maintain consistency. But achieving internal consistency in a program seems to be a different kind of challenge.