> JS does make sense given it's what you're using in the client.
Well JS is forced upon us on the browser and not everyone is tremendously happy about it. It has improved, but still. Plenty of folks out there will seek other languages, we will never all fully agree on what's good on the backend.
BTW - are we positive JS will have a monopoly on browsers 5-10 years from now? (I'm talking about WebAssembly). Cos if the monopoly is gone JS will die a violent death I think.
> BTW - are we positive JS will have a monopoly on browsers 5-10 years from now?
Yes.
I will assume your question arose from the exuberance of youth.
"Good enough" + inertia = Yes
It's not enough to be better; it has to be so much better, existing infrastructure and training must become moot. And preferably an obvious best to avoid balkanization.
See: Fortune 500 and their continued reliance on COBOL and mainframes rather than opting for replacement and retraining costs.
Well JS is forced upon us on the browser and not everyone is tremendously happy about it. It has improved, but still. Plenty of folks out there will seek other languages, we will never all fully agree on what's good on the backend.
BTW - are we positive JS will have a monopoly on browsers 5-10 years from now? (I'm talking about WebAssembly). Cos if the monopoly is gone JS will die a violent death I think.