That was my initial pitch too. But after months, almost no one seemed to have warmed up to it. When we changed it to "when", just about everyone seemed to like it better.

Syntax design is weird. Sometimes the only way to tell if I did it right is when no one says anything. People complained when I used "if". No one did after I switched it to "when". <shrug>

It’s always bugged me when syntax selection is done by popular vote. The most frequent vocal complaints tend to be from people who just have to adjust to something new. But if you only ever show a user what they’ve already seen, you inhibit the ability to innovate / try new things.

The flip side is that it also bugs me when language / library designers make weird choices that don’t seem to have a compelling reason (or at least the compelling reason for the difference doesn’t outweigh the cost of being different).

No win situation ultimately except to figure out who has good language tastes and weight their feedback more, but that’s subjective and something people try to avoid, ignoring that they’ve already done this by virtue of limiting who the experts are working on it in the first place.

> if you only ever show a user what they’ve already seen

Familiarity and intuitive structure in a low context language is very important. A language syntax is for humans to comprehend. If a new syntax is under discussion, it's probably around new functionality (or sugar). Where is "encourages innovation" in the list of reasons to use any specific syntax? I would say, far down on the list.