2 ms·
If it wasn't that good for a backend it wouldn't have maintained complete domination of that market for decades, which it has. Incidentally the number of web de
by forgetfreeman 2y ago
If it wasn't that good for a backend it wouldn't have maintained complete domination of that market for decades, which it has. Incidentally the number of web development projects that have any objective use of async programming or fussy types is a rounding error. Perhaps your interests are pointing in another direction?
- ecjhdnc2025 2y agoI remember someone trying to recruit me for a London-based startup whose developers were obsessed with async and Meteor. They struggled to ship (it was a silly idea anyway) and I don't think they survived their pivot. But the tools choice was a good part of the problem: it wasn't ready and they were imagining it had harnessable pixie dust. I can see applications for async work within the wider backend all over the place. But the objective justification for the async stuff being involved in the rendering of page content is thin. And since the other applications are for sort of "high level systems" programming -- that boundary between the app and the OS -- I personally prefer Go for all of that. Node is a significant devOps/package management pain that belongs in as few places as possible.
- bearjaws 2y agoJavaScript is a terrible language and it still dominates front end :)
- forgetfreeman 2y agoThere are two types of developers that consistently bitch about languages: junior developers with delusions of grandeur and senior development that drank the coolaid and are yoked to a project using the wrong stack.