"If you CAN'T express A (any, all, something!) solution using EXISTING LANGUAGES and TOOLS, %100 guarantee the problem is simply your lack of knowledge and experience in Computer Science."
- i can see that. However, that doesn't prove that existing tools are OPTIMAL.
"There is a time and a place for language changes and updates"
- For example?
- You didn't say "new languages". I agree that some, maybe much, new tool/language dev may be unnecessary/redundant, generated by people who need to justify their salaries or don't know existing tools. However, their unnecessary new tool-dev doesn't prove that new tool-dev is never justified.
"How do you define variables?"
- Heavens! A different way of defining a variable! That alone isn't a valid criticism of a new language. I agree that if the new language doesn't offer benefits over existing languages, that's IS a valid criticism.
"Every translation the human brain has to make at the syntax level...."
- Again, you seem to be speaking as if programmers are expected to learn every new language that comes along, which is certainly not the case.
"... is just ONE more level of complexity to something where LESS complexity is valued highest,"
- Unclear whether you mean: you, developers of new languages value less complexity, or computing in general should or does value less complexity.
- There are high-level and low-level languages. I think it's appropriate for high-level languages to value less complexity. Isn't that part of the definition of "high-level"?