It might surprise people, but my strongest languages are all SQL derivates. 4th generation languages, meant specifically for dealing with Set Data and Data Transformation. I fully acknowledge, they are NOT ideal languages for things like Web programming, or Systems programming.
You conveniently leave the context of your breakdown of my response:
The syntax is NOT a valid criticism for new languages... Ha Ha Ha
Here is Kelly Code:
?B |-| 394 ... 3847 /% :2 ~ A
It defines a variable A, does a null check on variable B, loops from 394 to 3847, performing absolute value next then checking if it is a modulus of 2, piping all values into list variable A.
Heavens dear! Kelly has truly solved an expression problem, truly, TRUST ME, there is LITERALLY no other way to EXPRESS that! Syntax variation is the PRIMARY ROOT CAUSE of technical debt. I will die in my grave on that statement.
Computer Science is all about abstracting complexity in the quest for simplicity. It is an unending quest with no finish.
I see high and low-level programming languages as not a matter of complexity but a matter of how much fine-grain control of the Hardware do you need.
Again, leaving context out. Even professionals with decades of experience will struggle to communicate with other HUMANS when language is changed. It is a problem of TECHNIQUE, not language expression.
-Charlies Dickens is only known today because we left the English character at 26, FOREVER!
-Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart is only known today because the Music Notation core has not evolved!
-Pythagoras is only known today because the field of Math hasn't changed the equals sign!
??? is only known today because they sent Humans to the moon by writing Software Code... who was it? oh, who cares, they didn't know what they were doing anyway, because FORTRAN was not OPTIMAL for any job.
Software Languages are only ~75 years old, and yet, people like you, truly believe; in that small mind of yours; that we still haven't figured out how to express algorithms yet. It MUST be a new language developed by some Major corporation that TELLS you it is NEEDED. Then you push it at your organization, not even thinking that maybe 10,000 out of the 7 billion people on the planet know anything about how to implement this new language. You get 1 project success, leave your company, work somewhere else. The company now has to pay 4-10x your annual salary to reverse engineer and maintain the work you did in this NEW language. Literally, there are no practitioners in it; and their investment is worth nothing and a liability.
Exponential technical debt is your argument, and I disagree 100%.