Many outside the Rust community see the enthusiasm for Rust as overblown. Perhaps they think that pushing back on Rust to create a brake on this momentum is restoring the balance or something.

One thing I have noticed, when devs push back on inferior languages, they are able to cite all kinds of technical reasons for doing so. When they cannot come up with reasons, perhaps that is evidence that the language is pretty good.

Ted’s rant basically says “we have more code so we matter more and that will be true for a long time”. I agree with the assessment that this kind of blatant tribalism is “non-technical nonsense”.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

The thing I don't get in these discussions is that there are people who have convinced themselves that a language we came up with in the first 20 years or so of the industry's existence is the pinnacle of programming language development and that all those newer languages are really completely equivalent in terms of outcome once you add up their up- and downsides.