3 ms·
[edited to make my point clearer] This is not about "value" of the language (worse is better) it is just about cost (cheap is better). Hiring js dev is cheaper
by homarp 5y ago
[edited to make my point clearer]
This is not about "value" of the language (worse is better) it is just about cost (cheap is better).
Hiring js dev is cheaper because it is cheaper/faster to learn js.
- hnlmorg 5y agoYou're just reiterating the same points I made :)
- homarp 5y agoedited to try to clarify my point. Mostly reacting to your last sentence.
- hnlmorg 5y agoI'd already said JS was quicker to learn and cheaper to hire though. The "worse is better" statement is just a phrase intended to succinctly summarise that point: > It refers to the argument that software quality does not necessarily increase with functionality: that there is a point where less functionality ("worse") is a preferable option ("better") in terms of practicality and usability. Software that is limited, but simple to use, may be more appealing to the user and market than the reverse. ( Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worse_is_better https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worse_is_better ) JS is simpler and cheaper thus preferable. I guess I took for granted that not everyone is familiar with that phrase, sorry