Syntax is important because of two distinct reasons. First is technical: how complex the syntax is impacts how fast, how many and how good tools (for refactoring, autocomplete, docs generation, macros and so on) will be created for the language.
Second reason is sociological in nature, and also is further divided into two reasons, one reasonable and the other stupid.
The first is that it's natural for people to use simpler things first. If the syntax involved in spawning a new thread is much more complex than the syntax for making and passing a callback you're going to end with most language users using event-driven, reactor based programming, even if launching a new thread would be more efficient (up to some threshold of difference in performance, above which people will feel it's worth it to use more complex feature). In short, syntax matters in that it statistically dictates how the language is used, which impacts what "best practices" and "idioms" are created.
The second reason is idiotic and unprofessional. Imagine a carpenter who refuses to use a hammer because it has a pink handle, even if it's the only or the best hammer in some circumstances. Emotions felt towards tools - and specifically syntaxes - are what amateurs can get away with, but it's also one of the things which defines them as amateurs. The syntax is "awkward"? "intimidating"? ("unreadable" is a whole another can of worms) That's either funny or pathetic, depending on circumstances.
If you are a professional programmer, you should be already at least comfortable with 5+ styles of syntax, including C-like, Pascal-like, Lisp-like and Prolog-like. This makes it impossible for any syntax to ever "intimidate" you.
Syntax is important because of two distinct reasons. First is technical: how complex the syntax is impacts how fast, how many and how good tools (for refactoring, autocomplete, docs generation, macros and so on) will be created for the language.
Second reason is sociological in nature, and also is further divided into two reasons, one reasonable and the other stupid.
The first is that it's natural for people to use simpler things first. If the syntax involved in spawning a new thread is much more complex than the syntax for making and passing a callback you're going to end with most language users using event-driven, reactor based programming, even if launching a new thread would be more efficient (up to some threshold of difference in performance, above which people will feel it's worth it to use more complex feature). In short, syntax matters in that it statistically dictates how the language is used, which impacts what "best practices" and "idioms" are created.
The second reason is idiotic and unprofessional. Imagine a carpenter who refuses to use a hammer because it has a pink handle, even if it's the only or the best hammer in some circumstances. Emotions felt towards tools - and specifically syntaxes - are what amateurs can get away with, but it's also one of the things which defines them as amateurs. The syntax is "awkward"? "intimidating"? ("unreadable" is a whole another can of worms) That's either funny or pathetic, depending on circumstances.
If you are a professional programmer, you should be already at least comfortable with 5+ styles of syntax, including C-like, Pascal-like, Lisp-like and Prolog-like. This makes it impossible for any syntax to ever "intimidate" you.