[tayo42]

> When there is community disagreement and library churn, I think it ends up evolving better, more liked solutions;

That's an optimistic way of thinking about. I feel hesitant to pull in libraries because you don't know when or why the community is going decide to change. Then your that fool using that old code, stuck with sudden tech debt.

It also makes stuff like stackoverflow weird to use where you get different answers depending on the year. I think the biggest problem is with libraries that try to make things more ergnomic. Learning about pin and how to use it is weird, everyone keeps recommending some higher level library.

[lostdog]

Unfortunately a standard library doesn't really reduce churn. It just means to you chunks of the standard library being deprecated, which can be confusing. For example, what's the common way to download a file from the web in Python?

Instead, I think every language should have a list of batteries-suggested libraries, with a roughly 2 year turnover period. This way you get a community suggested group of the common functionality needed to be productive. It won't change so frequently that you're constantly looking up function names, but it also won't get sclerotic, and can move from old grungy libraries to new libraries when necessary. Of course, you can always just stick with an old "edition" of the community libs if you've got a legacy app that you don't want to migrate.