"C++, Rust, and D have a large number of features and it can be distracting from the actual meaning of the application you are working on. One finds themselves debugging their knowledge of the programming language instead of debugging the application itself."
It's an interesting point. My experience with it, though, is that if the language is too simple, the complexity gets pushed off into the application. The result is "boilerplate", a lot of code that gets routinely cut&pasted into applications.
The thing about complexity in the language, on the other hand, is once you do learn the language, that skill follows you with every app you work with. With complexity pushed to the app, you have to re-learn it with every app.
A screwdriver can do a lot of things - chisel, hammer, scraper, prybar, punch, paint stirrer, shim, etc. But I prefer having a set of tools designed to be chisels, hammers, etc. My projects come out a lot nicer.
It's an interesting point. My experience with it, though, is that if the language is too simple, the complexity gets pushed off into the application. The result is "boilerplate", a lot of code that gets routinely cut&pasted into applications.
The thing about complexity in the language, on the other hand, is once you do learn the language, that skill follows you with every app you work with. With complexity pushed to the app, you have to re-learn it with every app.
A screwdriver can do a lot of things - chisel, hammer, scraper, prybar, punch, paint stirrer, shim, etc. But I prefer having a set of tools designed to be chisels, hammers, etc. My projects come out a lot nicer.