Quaternions and complex words

I was making modifications to a script for a Torus in blender and it uses Quaternions to multiply vectors and that would be a complex subject by itself ( that is kind of a joke ), but it occurred to me that programming evolved from the IBM culture in the US and as such is very limited. It seems that IBM and people who worked with the first machines established a precedent that people would interface to the machine as automatons. Perhaps it was the limited capabilities of the machine at the time or the limited imagination of the creators. Hardware designers tend to be very strict, precise and dull. Software people seem to be flighty, imprecise and imaginative. Since I do both, the conflict is obvious.

It seems to me that attempting to symbolize the interface to a computer with the ASCII or EBCDIC symbol set is actually very absurd. It leads to many situations that are ambiguous. If I use sin(angle) it seems straight forward, but suppose I want to use a new grouping like real language? If I wanted sin(the angle of the field), it would not be possible due to the type of parsing. If there were an operator that was [] beginning and end of phrase it would be possible. All the operators are used and even used in duplicate ways. It creates a contextual nightmare.

I am thinking of making a completely new programming language that generates C or python using a preprocessor. If I use an extended character set, I can mark a section with XML and have better meaning and more understandable code. I can make an editor which hides the XML in the same way that HTML hides the formatting information. If the Chinese had first developed computers we would not have this situation. They have a richer symbol set and could easily have assigned non overlapping symbols.

It seems that the system designed in the 30's is a very poor framework for something as complex as it has become. It seems a character set that is 16 bits would be a reasonable step to allow meaning and interpretation to be less tangled. I can't say that anybody would adopt my ideas, but that leaves them struggling with a garden hose that is too short to reach and I prefer to spend the time to repair the system for the long term benefit and ability to reach higher levels of complexity without collapse of the underlying infrastructure.