[cercatrova]

> Well I kind of like the dogfooding of all the build tools for JS being written in JS - why introduce a whole new ecosystem here?

You might find this answer helpful, about Rome which is like Vite but in Rust rather than Go [0], crucially:

> This justification -- Rome should be written in JS otherwise Rome users are less likely to contribute -- irresponsibly focuses on a secondary goal of the project, at the cost of the primary goal, which is to be a end-to-end toolchain for one of the most popular languages in the world.

Speed matters. It is not a sideline consideration, it should be one of the main considerations, over and above a tool being in the same language. In fact, many say that rewriting JS tools in non-JS faster languages will be the future [1].

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28609474

[1] https://leerob.io/blog/rust#the-future-of-javascript-tooling (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29192088)

[SOLAR_FIELDS]

I think it's a fair argument but I guess time will play it out to see if it succeeds. It's a bit of a chicken and egg thing, like with most newer open source projects intended to replace older ones. To take off, you need contributors. If you can't get contributors, it won't take off. The value add needs to be strong enough to attract enough developers to overcome the Rust/Go hurdle. I'd wager more on Go in this regard, for your average developer not having to worry about garbage collection is probably going to be a significant plus.