[vacuity]

I'm aware of personal taste, but I will say

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

- Upton Sinclair

and note (because it is not included in the quote) that a literal salary is not necessary or sufficient. Really? Is this not just resigning to subpar software? My counterpoint is that what is popular is not necessarily what should be popular. And I think you're still tunnel-visioning for a specific thing to criticize. Do I have to keep giving examples until I find one you will deign to agree is a serious issue? Just as hasty generalization is harmful, so is hasty specialization. Perhaps you personally don't see a problem, but there can be many reasons for that.

[90s_dev]

> Is this not just resigning to subpar software?

It's getting from point A to point B with whatever works best given the circumstances after considering all the pros and cons. Sometimes that is garbage software. I mean I've even used _____ once or twice! [edit] redacted to not throw any software under the bus

[vacuity]

> It's getting from point A to point B with whatever works best given the circumstances after considering all the pros and cons.

I agree with you on this, but on this forum that's full of people who write software, I'm skeptical that making better software isn't often (usually?) the better choice. But I understand that this is one of those "critical mass" things where a few people can't do nearly as much.

[90s_dev]

The point is that "better" is relative to a whole bunch of trade-offs that you have to manage and pick and choose per language per project pre need, and just like in spoken language, there's no obvious Perfect Software Language. They all have trade-offs.

[vacuity]

Sure, but different languages tend towards different outcomes, and I think we rather should be going towards certain outcomes.

[90s_dev]

We finally agree U+1F91D