First, I agree 100% with what you just wrote. To the letter, at least. Now it doesn't mean we shouldn't be weary of sentences like "right tool for the job", "e

First, I agree 100% with what you just wrote. To the letter, at least. Now it doesn't mean we shouldn't be weary of sentences like "right tool for the job", "every tools has qualities". While they are correct generalities, they are often used to justify not to change habits: "We'll use C++. Don't say that, every tools have qualities. Besides, this is a big project. Languages are just tools, and you better use one that fits the job". You could try to go against this trend: "But, because it's big doesn't mean we have to use C++. It doesn't mean you have to use only one language. It doesn't mean you have to squeeze every cycle out of your CPU. What about C + Lua? Simplicity by default, and speed where you need it". But if you have to overcome fear of changing one's habits, this won't be enough. Also, you seem to think that no tool dominates another. With that I disagree. Let's start with a contrived example: Lisp vs Blub, where Blub is Lisp without macros. I think it's reasonable to say that Lisp dominates Blub. A similar reasoning led me to think that ML dominates Java and C#[1] (at least if I pretend libraries don't exist and programmers know ML). Sure, it hurts feelings to say to someone that his favourite tool is strictly worse than some other tool. But it doesn't make it wrong. [1]: http://www.loup-vaillant.fr/articles/classes-suck http://www.loup-vaillant.fr/articles/classes-suck