I would argue that, for many users, manually installing software leads to a greater understanding of that software.
Take Linux/Bash as an example. What better way to learn Linux than to agonize over a Linux From Scratch installation, building CUPS, and successfully printing a test page to your printer?
I don't see how installing a compiler would improve your understanding of the language the compiler is for. If anything, it would improve your understanding of whatever installing software (bash, makefiles, etc.).
I agree, and I've been thinking of replacing what I have with a better sample program. The problem is finding a small example.
I mean, sure, I could post the code for my memory allocator, which showcases lower level raw memory manipulation, or a the formatting code, which showcases runtime type information, or some of the traits for iterables, but all of these take some time to digest, especially without first reading an introduction to the language.
Actually the "Hello ..." program is not so bad to show first. After all, it is a tradition, and like other introductions in the social universe, greetings serve a purpose. "Hello world" instantly tells me, ah, "this language is a lot like C with some interesting differences".
From there quickly getting into the features that make the language unique will prevent reader boredom. Overall your site was nicely done. One aspect I particularly liked is that you described all of the syntax in the examples. I really dislike when a new language is presented without making clear what symbols mean, as if I would just automatically know.
It will be interesting to see how Myrddin comes along.
Take Linux/Bash as an example. What better way to learn Linux than to agonize over a Linux From Scratch installation, building CUPS, and successfully printing a test page to your printer?