Pronouns for code vary in different programming communities.
Feature oriented: "This library ... it provides"
Contributor oriented: "Our library ... we provide"
Anthropomorphising: "I provide"
Smalltalk favours the third option, which still makes me smile :)
Related Posts
Is there any relationship between language adoption and the size of its standard library?
These days it seems completely orthogonal, but early Java adopters spoke highly of the collections library compared with C++.
Maybe it's the widespread availability of package managers?
TIL Tcl has a notion of 'safe interpreters', a mode where you can run untrusted code in a sandbox: https://www.tcl.tk/man/tcl8.4/TclCmd/safe.htm
Not many programming languages have this, but it's way safer to include in the implementation than try to build as a userland library.
@tristanC That's an option! There's often cases where you know what the user wanted though, so you can provide a sensible AST that the toolchain can handle.
For example, a malformed string literal can still be parsed a string so type checking etc can be helpful.