[yayr]

I really appreciate the amount of detail and scope in the Wolfram technology. However, I think the language design and the understanding of what makes a good language is quite flawed...

Just one example from the article: "While the core of a standard programming language typically has perhaps a few tens of primitive functions built in, the Wolfram Language has more than 5600—with many of those individually representing major pieces of computational intelligence"

Looking at those "primitives" I would rather interpret them as "functions" or even "Classes" instead of primitives. And other languages have indeed lots of them, arguably more than the Wolfram language. Which leads to another problem with the language design: Most of those functions are too restricted and too unextendable imo. Also the tech is a quite closed system. This makes it hard to really built upon all the great work the Wolfram team puts into the technology.

[nemoniac]

The first sentence of the report defining the Scheme programming language:

"Programming languages should be designed not by piling feature on top of feature, but by removing the weaknesses and restrictions that make additional features appear necessary."