What about existing process languages? (Score 1)

Livshitz commented that "the problem should be addressed at the root by allowing process-specific constructs, such as "before/after", "cause/effect" and, perhaps, "system state" to be a core part of the language." She does not mention them, and I have not yet seen any comments on this topic on process oriented languages such as XPDL, BPML and BPEL, which were developed for workflow and business process management (BPM) systems. See ebpml.org for more on process markup languages. Those of us who use BPM know that relatively bug free applications (business processes) can be delivered in weeks rather than years while achieving the additional tricks of leaving human judgement in the loop while integrating legacy applications. Bug levels are reduced by directly executing intuitive diagrams and declarative statements. This reduces the "impedance mismatch" between business requirements and developer interpretations.