> Learning a new language shouldn't be difficult. Programmers are expected to familiarize themselves with new tech. I think that expectation is a problem. I m

> Learning a new language shouldn't be difficult. Programmers are expected to familiarize themselves with new tech. I think that expectation is a problem. I mean, sure, you can't use one single technology for any non-trivial project. But, on the other hand, is it really faster to read the spec and short comings of 20k different `left-pad` type "tech"? I think there's a line to be drawn: each new $TECH added as a dependency is a liability. The expectation should not be "throw every single tech we can think of into there, because programmers are expected to learn new tech". The calculus really should be "Each new $TECH we add increases our hiring burden, our ramp-up times, our diagnostic burden for when things go pear-shaped, our cognitive load when actually adding features, our tests, and eats into our training-time budget." Those are a lot of downsides, so before padding their CV the responsible developer should be balancing the trade-offs. Unfortunately that is rarely how it actually works.