I picked it because it's relevant to my own experience and what I see in broader tech, maybe your part of the ecosystem is better? (If memory serves the "stack

I picked it because it's relevant to my own experience and what I see in broader tech, maybe your part of the ecosystem is better? (If memory serves the "stack overflow crowd", the people who answer the surveys each year, are better at self-learning, but they're also much younger so there's a forcing element, and I still think represent a minority anyway.) I see that people have little interest in learning new things (whether it's languages, tools, concepts, or history) unless there's a strong incentive to do so, and even then there's resistance to change. Additionally the issue of finding programmers always seems to come up where I look -- I don't think Clojure is any more obscure than Go, yet in the video I linked they still had to onboard 50% of new hires in the language. For some companies that alone might be considered too much cost for the benefit. If a big company example isn't needed, you might be interested to know that https://www.ptc.com/en/products/cad/elements-direct/modeling https://www.ptc.com/en/products/cad/elements-direct/modeling exists -- I read somewhere it's made of several million lines of Common Lisp and has been developed over decades. Agreed that JS refactoring is often harder, though I don't think it's bad enough to say it's "much harder" than e.g. Java, and I'd prefer refactoring a large JS project to trying to refactor a large C++ project. Still, the bar for dynamic languages that JS sets is pretty darn low. Python, Clojure, and especially Common Lisp all do much better on the refactorability metric along with other metrics that people who prefer static typing usually care a lot about (e.g. warnings/errors about trivial misuse before runtime).