Irrespective of how many bugs that are and how severe they are, I love the mentality embedded in such a statement.
Seeing bugs live in bug trackers for years is depressing.
In fact, my only criticism is that it is a bit awkward to write simple Unix-style programs. The APL interpreter quite resisted being used in batch mode, and needed special flags to avoid launching background daemons or being chatty on the standard output streams. That was a few years ago, though - I wonder if it's been fixed.
Edit: looks like the search engines are much more favourable to GNU APL nowadays.
I use GNU APL as a smarter calculator, allowing to me manipulate datasets in a very flexible way. The programs I write a small utilities that I user interactively.
That said, the FILE_IO workspace provides access to low-level OS access. It can be a bit cumbersome to use, but it's good for building higher-level abstractions. As an example, last year I made an APL submission to Google Code Jam and while the solution to the problem was a single line of code, reading the data file and writing the output was significantly more.
An issue is how to enter the symbols. The way I do it is I created some input methods for Mac and Windows which use at-signs followed by the APL community name for the symbol:
Support for just about every programming language (e.g. https://www.gnu.org/software/apl/Community.html#EMACSMODE) is one reason why I found learning Emacs to be worth the effort.
At best it might become increasingly MARGINALLY more attractive.
It's not the "being able to type in the glyphs" that hurts it, as much as the reading them -- and the understanding of its concepts.
I use a HP48 pocket calculator, that comes with Lisp/Forth (RPL to name it) system. The interface is live interaction with a stack and a bunch of direct screen shortcuts.
I felt it was almost as fun as using emacs with a good lisp configuration. All this with a handful of keys and one level deep keyword folders. I'd bet a dollar that the same thing with an APL system would make people enjoy the language right away.
The mailing list is a great place to follow the development. If you have general APL questions, the members are usually happy to answer those too.
APL is a natural language for those who love math, however without the correct keyboard with APL fonts labeled on the keyboard I would think it to all be tedious. In 1986 there were some companys selling APL for IBM-PC's, and the SW included some stickers you could apply to your keyboard so you could know where to type the APL characters.
Most of the APL variants I saw on UNIX 1980-2000, used a terrible encoding system for using the APL font.
APL in many ways is like PYTHON of today, fast and powerful, back in the day even Tektronix offered a graphics terminal ( 1970 ) that let you code APL and generate graphics instantly not unlike what you can do today. The nice thing about APL is that all types and maxtrix/scalar/vector op's are taken care for you, you never had to worry about types.
In many way's APL with the proper keyboard is much better that what we have had ever since.
Around the Wheel we go as they used to say. Not unlike a hamster in a cage.
Also, all modern APL implementations use Unicode, which contains all the APL characters so there is no need to mess with special fonts something like that.