This article seems to be also proposing... a programming language. Or at least "environment". Visual programming is something people have proposed, as is interactive manipulation of an "actual" parse state, as with some of the Smalltalk environments. But then you still have different choices of abstractions, like what object model you use, or what concurrency model. I don't think you can avoid that by renaming it from "language".
You could program in raw machine code, then sure, no separate language, "just" instructions for the computer. But then each machine has a different... language, too.
Or you could program in "pure mathematics", expressions, etc., but then you have a choice of which formalism to use for that. I doubt there will be only one.
Yes. I am sure that most people who have tried to use a 'visual' programming environment to achieve anything non-trivial are relieved to get back to a text-based environment.
You could program in raw machine code, then sure, no separate language, "just" instructions for the computer. But then each machine has a different... language, too.
Or you could program in "pure mathematics", expressions, etc., but then you have a choice of which formalism to use for that. I doubt there will be only one.