> What scientist is going to want to write JS when they can choose Python? One who has a reason to? All languages have their strengths and weaknesses. Popular

> What scientist is going to want to write JS when they can choose Python? One who has a reason to? All languages have their strengths and weaknesses. Popular languages have a positive balance. JS is great for the web, and there's surely >0 applications in science that require web interoperability... The statement "mucking around with learning another language entirely", comes across as someone who hasn't experienced other languages to the point they see they often have more similarities than differences, become easier and easier to learn as a result, and are best used - at that point - like a box of tools, rather than the situation most programmers start with of using a screwdriver for everything because it's all they have. This is where more than a few scientists seem to have got stuck with Python, and possibly part of why the language itself has accelerated into becoming a bit of a mess - though they often do, anyway. (So much for that "just getting from A to B" thing, I hope it sticks around, but it's not looking good.) While many might not presently be in a position to, any scientist who could choose to use something more readily suited to a particular use-case, such as JS, or C, or Perl/Ruby, or Elixir (particularly with regard to ML lately), may find themselves reaching higher heights than they could have when limited to only Python. As with anything, those with more options have an edge over those with fewer.