> I see choosing "new" languages (or frameworks) as very risky propositions to the life of a project. These languages are less likely to be around in ten or twe

> I see choosing "new" languages (or frameworks) as very risky propositions to the life of a project. These languages are less likely to be around in ten or twenty years time (newer and better Rusts and Gos are likely to form in the years ahead) and in the meantime require you to constantly expend effort to prevent your projects from being turned into a brick by language/environment/library changes. In contrast my old C projects from 5-8 years ago still compile and run, with one particular example only needing a small modification. It's not perfect, but C is much more likely to be the "safe" option if time x usefulness of your project is a goal. The author's point would be strengthened by adding some examples of languages that seemed exciting at the time, gathered a large following, and then died - in the sense that software written in them no longer compiles or runs. I'm not able to think of any. Just recently on HN was an article about a Web framework written in FORTRAN of all things. It seems more likely that software considered throwaway today will still be chugging long after interest in the language has waned or been eclipsed by the next thing. And there will be lots of these former throwaways, keeping the language alive. Maybe for a very long time.