Weirdly enough I do believe Clojure ticks the boxes from that checklist.

It's familiar in that it both "supports popular language runtimes" (runs on top of the JVM or transpiles to JavaScript) and it's a Lisp dialect (or close enough) and Lisps have been around since a very long time.

It's incredibly stable: so stable some libraries commonly used haven't been updated in years. There's also very little code churn inside Clojure's own codebase.

It is very reliable.

It's limits and trade offs are well known.

Somehow I though my language of choice was "edgy" but I realize it may actually be "boring": a dialect from a very old family of language running on top of a boring tech (the JVM).

darksaints

I'd agree that clojure fits the boring tag, and that's a good thing. Unfortunately it's also dying. While many old libraries and tools are stable and functional, nothing new is really being created with it. The same couldn't be said for boring technologies like Java or Python.

twobitshifter

What about clojurescript?

bachmeier

My rule of thumb when someone says "Language X is dying" is to move on. I don't even use Clojure, and I can immediately come up with https://github.com/logseq/logseq and https://github.com/athensresearch/athens as funded companies making popular new products with Clojure.