You can have anything you wan...

I like the scope creep there:
Programming language (singular)
All programming languages and related knowledge
Add in AI, ML and data structures
- Bro needs to go big. Why not all electronics and electronic systems in general? As it is he could still be "caught with his pants down" by another speculative execution bug.
  
  DNA is a programming language. The fabric of space time could be a programming language. Keep going!
  
  Since this is something that needs to be considered while programming, I'd presume such information falls under "related knowledge".
- Sounds like they are the product owner :)

My head canon is that Tony Stark has a superpower: everything he builds works the first time.
If it's really complicated, like an entirely new Iron Man suit, then it might malfunction once in an amusing way. Then he tightens a screw and it's perfect. It never fails outright or bricks itself.
In my experience, this is not how hardware or software development goes. I want this power so much.
- Agreed. It's comical how he's seemingly able to rapidly build stuff that requires experience in multiple high end fields and then he even surrounds himself with his own tech and is not buried under maintenance hell for it all.
  My alternative head canon is that he's actually only good at building AIs and Jarvis and Friday are the ones who actually make all of his crazy ideas work.
  
  In a What If? episode, he made a suit that can transform into a racing car without creating AI first
- He is an Artificer, plain and simple

Instantly granted all programming knowledge
"Well what the... God damnit! Who the fuck thought that was a good idea? Fucking JavaScript architects!"
- Every npm package gets downloaded into your brain, immediately collapses into a black hole
- My gods. I think this just gave me flashbacks to this week.
  I was recently battling node's import/require shenanigans trying to figure out how to import a typescript module in my basic program. I feel this so hard.
  I walked away utterly hating the language and its ecosystem. Utterly defeated, I gave up.

Why limit yourself like that? Just say "All languages". Depending on how liberally you interpret the word "language", you know know just about everything.
- At that point just go for omniscience.
  
  Too far. I don’t need to know all that.
  
  I'm already a loner but omniscience would seal the deal.
- Fuck programming then, I'll go read ancient Egyptian or some not-yet-deciphered crap. On the other hand, I bet it's not that different from APL
  
  My old man told me he took one programming language in college and it was APL. Having looked at APL since becoming a software dev myself, I can understand why he hated it.
  It's just so gross and hard to read
  
  On the other hand, which do you prefer, this:
  
  life ← {⊃1 ⍵ ∨.∧ 3 4 = +/ +⌿ ¯1 0 1 ∘.⊖ ¯1 0 1 ⌽¨ ⊂⍵}
  or this:
  
  MODE UNIVERSE = [upb OF class universe, upb OF class universe]BOOL; STRUCT( INT upb, BOOL lifeless, alive, PROC(REF UNIVERSE)VOID init, PROC(REF UNIVERSE)STRING repr, PROC(REF UNIVERSE, INT, INT)VOID insert glider, PROC(REF UNIVERSE)VOID next ) class universe = ( # upb = # 50, # lifeless = # FALSE, # alive = # TRUE, # PROC init = # (REF UNIVERSE self)VOID: FOR row index FROM LWB self TO UPB self DO init row(self[row index, ]) OD, # PROC repr = # (REF UNIVERSE self)STRING:( FORMAT cell = $b("[]", " ")$, horizon = $"+"n(UPB self)("--")"+"l$; FILE outf; STRING out; associate(outf, out); putf(outf, (horizon, $"|"n(UPB self)(f(cell))"|"l$, self, horizon)); close(outf); out ), # PROC insert glider = # (REF UNIVERSE self, INT row, col)VOID:( self[row-2, col+1] := TRUE; self[row-1, col+2] := TRUE; self[row, col:col+2] := (TRUE, TRUE, TRUE ) ), # PROC next = # (REF UNIVERSE self)VOID:( [0:2, LWB self-1:UPB self+1]BOOL window; # init row(window[LWB window, ]); window[LWB self, 2 LWB window] := window[LWB self, 2 UPB window] := window[UPB window, 2 LWB window] := window[UPB window, 2 UPB window] := lifeless OF class universe; window[LWB self, LWB self:UPB self] := self[LWB self, ]; FOR row FROM LWB self TO UPB self DO REF []BOOL next row = window[(row+1) MOD 3, ]; IF row NE UPB self THEN next row[LWB self:UPB self] := self[row+1, ] ELSE init row(next row) FI; FOR col FROM LWB self TO UPB self DO INT live := 0; FOR row FROM row-1 TO row+1 DO REF[]BOOL window row = window[row MOD 3, ]; FOR col FROM col-1 TO col+1 DO IF window row[col] THEN live +:= 1 FI OD OD; self[row, col] := IF window[row MOD 3, col] THEN live -:= live = 3 FI OD OD ) );

Wish granted, goes on to create yet another "better" programming language.
btw, OP forgot "understanding", which is the harder part.
- Good point. Maybe that's why they clarified "all knowledge in data structures and ml and ai" in the end.
  Then again, just because you have all puzzle pieces (and a few extra) it does not mean you can solve it.

I woulda said Dr Manhattan powers.
- A blue penis?
  
  Don't forget total apathy for all human concerns
  
  Among other things.
- I think you might need to reread watchmen then
  
  I only watched the movie & the show.

I don't understand, isn't it what is required for junior positions these days, every manager would tell you that they also required soft skills. His wish won't even land him a job.
- All they had to wish for was to know COBOL. Job guaranteed.

Does this include all future invented programming languages?
- No, the flip side of this wish is your knowledge is frozen in time to when you make the wish and can never be updated. You gradually become more and more outdated as you fail to grasp even the simplest of changes to all languages in current usage.
  
  So I forever work on legacy systems.
  Not ideal, but there's quite a bit of job security in it.
  
  The upside to this is that you can still make good money as a legacy programmer. Just look at COBOL job listings.
  
  The ol' monkey's paw
  
  Well damn, that's kind of evil.
  
  At that point your fame as a Rockstar Dev (I hate myself for typing that) will allow you to transition to a cushy ceo position.
- Oh no, does this include all hypothetical alternate interpretations of the same code? So, you just look at the screen and go "yep, it definitely could mean something"?

If I was at any moment perfectly aware of every minute detail of every programming related topic, and could also apply it perfectly, I honestly think I'd get incredibly stressed and depressed. Stressed from all the billions of projects that I could improve, and would kinda feel the obligation to improve. And depressed because the whole reason I like programming is the learning part. Almost every project I start will end at the point where I learnt the most significant new stuff and it comes down to doing things that I know how to do. It'd ruin my primary hobby (and job) for me, which probably wouldn't result in me being very happy.
- Don't wish for knowledge, wish for wisdom. Of course then you will just realize that you should have just wished to be lucky.

Would go for all languages, spoken, written, typed, signed, listened too, seen, felt.
- Felt, eh?

I'd ask for the formula for cold fusion and all the required knowledge. That way I could save the earth, and also be super famous.

How do u ask to know everything without asking to know everything?

I'd like to download all of gbatek into my brain

I'm used to non-software managers thinking knowing a language is knowing how to make software systems, but other programmers? It's like saying if you know every language now you're a novelist. Knowing the language is just a basic necessary fundamental from which you can start to learn how to design and create software.

You can know all programing languages and still be dumb af not knowing what do do with them, xd.

I'd just wish to not be in Hell talking to Satan... I mean, literally anywhere else talking to literally anyone else is by definititon a better situation to be in.
To all contradictory replies, I said NOT be in Hell.