Red vs ATS

Other languages have complex, multi-step setups that beginners often get stuck on. Red has no installer, no setup, no dependencies*, just a single small (~1MB) command-line executable with both the compiler and repl. On Windows, you don't even have to launch executable from the command line--it has a GUI-console.

Red syntax is a lot like Rebol. It's easier than most languages for beginners to pick up.

Red has low enough access to do systems programming, but it's expressive enough for high-level scripting.

Red has very simple syntax that's easy to learn. It gets out of your way and lets you think about the problem instead, enhancing productivity.

ATS has a theorem-proving type system powerful enough to prove that its functions meet their specifications. This happens at compile time with no performance impact at runtime. This can be used to prove that an ATS program doesn't have bugs commonly found in C++ programs, like "this function never leaks memory" or "this program never attempts to divide by zero" or "this buffer never overflows" or to verify pointer arithmetic, etc.

The compiler (ATS/Postiats) is GPLv3.

The syntax is ML-like with the usual functional language features like pattern matching and tail-call optimization.

ATS works as a low-level systems language. ATS programs have performance and footprint comparable to programs written in C/C++.

Similar to Modula-3. This makes ATS a viable choice even for large-scale projects.

ATS can prove its concurrent programs have no deadlocks or race conditions.