If everybody was half again as smart as they are now, the gleaming perfection of the Ada language would become undeniable and everyone would adopt it immediately.
Seriously, why would "smarter people" not need tools as or more diverse than those in use now? You think that there's "one true language" of programming that is Universally Perfect and only our idiocy has prevented us from implementing it thus far?
I’m of the controversial opinion that’s it’s only not used more because of the cognitive overhead of its simplicity. Its few capabilities are so extremely overloaded and productivity very much depends on the savvy of the programmer.
It is also the clearest language I know for writing down thoughts in a computational logic.
I want to assume good intent, but the basis of the question is mildly offensive, no?
In a hypothetical world of super-geniuses, existing programming languages would be the new Scratch and adults would use something more advanced.
I don't think it's offensive to consider programming paradigms that would be too difficult for most people to ever wrap their heads around.
I guess what I want to ask is if the popularity of programming languages is related to mankind's cognitive ability as a whole species, or if the designing of programming languages is optimizing towards a certain cognitive level. Or, say if we want to design a programming language only for ChatGPT, what kind of programming language would that look like. I think it's an interesting open end question leading to many directions. Again, no offense.
Early programming was machine code or flipping switches. Then assembly. Then C, Forth or similar low-level languages.
Now many people use scripting languages, Python, Go & other high-level languages.
See the pattern? The general evolution is from machine-friendly to human-friendly. Regardless of programmer's IQ.
The logical endgame is programming your toaster with spoken commands. Or no programming at all. It'll just watch your responses to learn how you like your toast.
Coding outside of the pedestrian languages can be a border line mystical experience. Mind expanding. Life changing. Just not in JavaScript; sorry :-)
I do agree with limiting the power of languages used. Scala was the cautionary tale I'd experienced. The team can agree to limit themselves to the less complex forms, but it's a slippery slope and many end up adding just a bit until everything the language has to offer gets used somewhere. Then it takes a good chunk of the team to sort out any area on second look, or a new better team to maintain what's been produced.
I think programming languages should have 2 scores: how good it feels to write new code in it; how bad it feels to maintain old code in it.