Rust

Rust 0.6 is out. Why are you still using C or Lisp when there are better alternatives?

fn map<T, U>(vector: &[T], function: &fn(v: &T) -> U) -> ~[U] {
    let mut accumulator = ~[];
    for vec::each(vector) |element| {
        accumulator.push(function(element));
    }
    return accumulator;
}

If you design a new language, why would you repeat a bad design. If you went from C to C++, this is acceptable. But if you went from nothing to <Some new cool shiny language>, you could at least think up a more reasonable syntax.

For example, you could split the type declaration from the value declaration. Of course I understand the reasoning. Everybody knows C, yes? So everybody can use your language now.

Except that programmers, who can actually program, appreciate succinct syntax. Actually parse-able and human readable. Because that programmers understand that they have to maintain their code and need to share their code with others. It enables them to create code walkers, such as linters or transformation tools. These programmers will start programming on your language, make the toolchain better and drive the language into large corporations. 

The second group is not really a programmer. They can only use one hammer in one way and don't want it to change. Rust is now actively targeting this group. They are targeting for mediocrity. 

The third group is an engineer. The language is a precision tool, something they can dream. They need it for direct access to the machine. They don't like abstraction layers. They will never switch a language. So rust is missing these.

Rust will not be able to reach the first group. Not enough uniqueness. And rust will also not target the third group. Not enough control. Only the second will touch it. That's sad.

At a certain point a new Rust with yet newer features, but C-like, comes aboard and the old Rust has to go swim in the sea in a dirty washcloth basket.