> Surely you agree that languages designed with one purpose in mind (a la Go and networking/server development) can reasonably do better at that purpose than an

> Surely you agree that languages designed with one purpose in mind (a la Go and networking/server development) can reasonably do better at that purpose than an explicitly general-purpose language? I don't think that's a given. Just because a language is more special-purpose, doesn't mean that a more general purpose language can do the same things as seamlessly as in the other language (maybe they would have to define an embedded DSL, but that might be simple). Maybe the special-purpose language decided to commit to certain things in its domain - like certain concurrency features - and make it "first class", since that was its intended domain. But then maybe that concurrency feature wasn't that useful and a more general purpose language - which had to keep its options open since it was general purpose - could express other alternative features more easily.