> Just not the browser Most backend frameworks need literal compilation - all that's different here is that the target is a specific JS version, not machine co

> Just not the browser Most backend frameworks need literal compilation - all that's different here is that the target is a specific JS version, not machine code. Additionally, there's a bit of "naivety" here - browser vendors are the ones that implement native features, and that's clearly not a domain that a random developer can impact. Instead it's JS frameworks and associated tooling, which is all very strong now. The idea that Angular or Vue are somehow going to work in the browser directly is, once again, absurd, and please stop saying it. > What's the churn on Pandas I find it silly that you'll cite Pandas as not having churn when its parent language just underwent a large, painful, poorly received transition. > It will be surprising if React is around in 5 more years You are saying the same things people said 5 years ago about React. My React code from 2016 still compiles against the newest version of React, and works correctly. Honestly, you're a classic example of this - you started developing not in JS, you felt some warts of JS, and now you hate JS and are ready to throw the baby out with the bathwater. I'll be more surprised if "native web components" or "webassembly" are actually supporting production use cases in 5 years than if React is.