Everyone loves a good Javascript punching bag but I would argue that the language/ecosystem has the most inertia and positive change within it. It's not perfect and it's exhausting at times, but I'm confident that the language will continue to move towards something more robust and ergonomic.
One more thing to note. From the post:
> In a C application, try as hard as I may, at the end of the day I am always on my own, making sure the invariants I need for memory safety hold. In Rust, I can be 100% confident that I will not have memory-unsafe code. Not 98%-and-I’d-better-check-those-last-2%-really-closely. One hundred percent. That’s a game-changer.
I think if you're always leaning on a compiler for correctness, maybe your problem doesn't reside in the static vs dynamic debate.
In the computer world, the worst thing often ends up winning.
The reason? Market forces are more powerful than technical features.
This means that if you rush a bad implementation out the door and it gets adopted by the masses, the network effects will ensure your bad solution wins.
Meanwhile, competitors that are working on a high quality competing language or product will be later to market and miss the train.
One more thing to note. From the post:
> In a C application, try as hard as I may, at the end of the day I am always on my own, making sure the invariants I need for memory safety hold. In Rust, I can be 100% confident that I will not have memory-unsafe code. Not 98%-and-I’d-better-check-those-last-2%-really-closely. One hundred percent. That’s a game-changer.
I think if you're always leaning on a compiler for correctness, maybe your problem doesn't reside in the static vs dynamic debate.