Do reviewers tend to reward or dismiss the use of new languages in scientific computing projects? In the past I used to use a lot of Python/R/MATLAB which are the standard in many scientific disciplines. However, recently I have dived into Julia and now everything I'm doing is in Julia (including workshops, blogs, etc. to help teach and promote it!). And there are a lot of very good reasons to use Julia for these kinds of projects.

However, if I am to be publishing algorithms which have Julia code, should I be expecting backlash from reviewers? Should I have alternative versions (like a MATLAB version) also included until Julia gains more acceptance? I am curious as to whether other's past experience with using new tools was a headache, or whether reviewers tend to find it as a little extra novelty.

The field is numerical analysis, more specifically developing new computational methods for stochastic (partial) differential equations. It's written in Julia because from my experience I get massive performance increases over other scripting languages while requiring minimal coding/debugging time. In the paper, everything is written as psudocode for legibility. Note that R/Python/C have language binding tools which can allow someone (with some work) to use the code as a blackbox, but MATLAB users would have to re-implement the code themselves (the langugages are quite similar)
I tend to get annoyed reading a paper that has its code examples in an atypical language for the area. I don't want to have to learn the language to understand the examples. Unless the paper is about the language and its features or advantages or disadvantages, the example code should be as straightforward to understand as possible, and using a toy or hobby language to provide algorithm examples makes the review harder to do. I'm likely to decline to even do the review if I don't think I'll be able to get through it easily. For example, working in high performance computing (my area), unless the paper is about the advantages of a new run-time system with its own language, I don't want to see some sparse matrix algebra routines in Haskell or Julia since I don't come close to speaking or understanding either of those languages. I'd rather you use a made up psuedo-code description of the implementation and not even provide the actual code unless you're making a specific point about the implementation that's part of the new results.