> Dynamic languages such as PHP, JS, Python and Ruby, in addition to being relatively poorly designed, are the languages that powered the explosion of the web

> Dynamic languages such as PHP, JS, Python and Ruby, in addition to being relatively poorly designed, are the languages that powered the explosion of the web The author seems to paint a broad brush in saying all dynamic languages are poorly designed. Languages can have different design goals. From Matz, Ruby's creator; > Instead of emphasizing the what, I want to emphasize the how part: how we feel while programming. That's Ruby's main difference from other language designs. I emphasize the feeling, in particular, how I feel using Ruby. ( http://www.artima.com/intv/rubyP.html http://www.artima.com/intv/rubyP.html ) So one of Ruby's primary design goals was programmer happiness, and in that respect it isn't not poorly designed at all. The technical 'perfection' of a programming language only matters to a point, it's us as programmers people that have to speak its language all day, and optimising for how we feel doing it is a valid design goal. I don't think it is a valid criticism to say something is poorly designed, without looking at its design goals. Every language is poorly designed in one way or another.