>Everything moves to be of higher abstraction to where it's more natural for humans to think and perhaps eventually it will be like writing an essay to get what

>Everything moves to be of higher abstraction to where it's more natural for humans to think and perhaps eventually it will be like writing an essay to get what you want I hold the opposite view. Now that compilers are getting smart enough to do very good type inference, and the fact that tools are evolving, I believe strict, static typing will be the future. The better the type system, the more runtime bugs you prevent from happening. While fighting against the compiler as a veteran programmer is a bit foreign (and makes you feel dumb), it's infinitely preferable than having to debug obscure production bugs. Good compilers are like a massive suite of unit tests you get for free. I also see the future of programming languages being functional in nature. Not because of the oft-repeated 'good for concurrency' misnomer (it's an orthogonal issue), but simply because it forces you to think a different way that ends up being more correct than imperative styles. It takes me much longer (somewhat ashamed to admit) to write a functional library than an imperative one, however, I've been amazed at how well they've turned out and the reuse is much greater.