I assume (in good faith) that it isn’t meaning general purpose the way that I interpret the word “general purpose.” But still... it does indeed immediately give an adverse reaction. This phrasing should really be adjusted to prevent further bad first impressions...
Objective-S is an architecture-oriented programming language based loosely on Smalltalk and Objective-C. It currently runs on macOS, iOS and Linux, the latter using GNUstep.
By allowing general architectures, Objective-S is the first general purpose programming language.
What we currently call general purpose languages are actually domain specific languages for the domain of algorithms.
Which is an interesting premise, but it could use a lot more explanation on what makes this language actually "general purpose" and not itself a domain specific language for the domain of algorithms (in particular, representing something other than algorithms where this language excels).
As it stands, it looks exactly like a domain specific language for the domain of "algorithms that expect to be run on a system with Cocoa or some approximation thereof". But I'm probably missing something, in which case that something could use some explication in the introduction or on the "about" page.
To me at least “general purpose” describes almost all programming languages with the exception of “special purpose” or “domain specific” languages like SQL, Prolog or XSLT.
