I mean, if you work on a CRUD application, you're kindof stuck where you are. If it's written in Python, I think it's naive to think that your JavaScript knowle

I mean, if you work on a CRUD application, you're kindof stuck where you are. If it's written in Python, I think it's naive to think that your JavaScript knowledge will be very helpful: So many things are just too different. The JavaScript developer is looking for promises and maybe event streams, but 11 years ago, Python asyncio was uncommon, so you've got a thread-per-worker model. It's terrible any way you cut it! What you've got that's similar: Block structure, single dispatch, everything's an atom, and a few seemingly familiar keywords like "for" and "if" that despite working differently, often appear in familiar patterns. I mean, how different is for k in x: than x.forEach(k =>? It seems like enough of these things dominate those first few steps into the unknown that they provide a comforting handrail into the descent into the coming madness, but it's difficult for me to believe it provides anything more than that. And it's my experience that kind of comfort can be a lie: To read a fragment of well-documented code, to be amazed in the work and thought that clearly has gone into it, only to discover that fragment contained a bug I skipped over (since that area was so well tested and so clearly good) simply because I didn't bother to actually read it. So now I read. And maybe I read JavaScript and Python a little slower than others, what's important to me is that I also read JavaScript and Python slower than I read k. I think that's a valuable trade. But I think you're touching on something important: It's very difficult to mix in a little bit of k into an existing application to "try it out". I hope that there may be things we can do to the environment to make k more accessible and approachable that don't involve trying to cut out this valuable thing, because this thing that makes k unique is just so good I don't want to give it up.