3 ms·

Eh there's definitely some value in having the tooling be explorable and comprehensible to the line programmers. The value depends on the situation of course, l

Eh there's definitely some value in having the tooling be explorable and comprehensible to the line programmers. The value depends on the situation of course, like in the scientific python example probably low-close-to-zero. But I think that's an outlier and the value is usually higher than that. Not always necessarily enough to outweigh other concerns, and I don't think always using the end language for tooling is the correct choice either. But it's a sensible default that you should make sure you get real value out of deviating from.

nicoburns 4y ago
> there's definitely some value in having the tooling be explorable and comprehensible to the line programmers. I think part of the reason Rust has been so popular in this niche is that it is pretty comprehensible to JavaScript/TypeScript/Python programmers. It's in any case much more approachable than C/C++ which would be the other alternative. The Rust build system also helps a lot too. (obviously performance is the main driver)