[jcampbell1]

> The few who responded seemed to dislike it, not for any particular technical objection to the language or its features, but simply to its existence at all, which surprised me.

It seems that the author is surprised by rational human behavior. A new language introduces a tradeoff between having a new tool that may better solve your problems, and introducing fragmentation where the developer must invest time learning a new language and tooling or the developer faces a smaller body of code that he can work on.

I like and use CS, but the author's philosophy that more languages in use always better for everyone, is fundamentally flawed.

[focusaurus]

So let me clarify that my general take on the state of programming languages today is that they are all pretty terrible and we don't have a good track record of fixing known flaws with them. With tend to just live with them. Given that, most new languages offer a shining chance at progress toward something better. They indicate someone is thinking about the problem and trying to help. Thus by default I like new programming languages per say. But yes, each does add to the total body of stuff out there, which has a cost.