JavaScript only excels in one aspect: the size of its community which is mostly, but not exclusively, formed by poorly qualified web page prototypers.
JavaScript is distributed across billions of devices. Nothing else comes close.
If you read my comment as an endorsement of JavaScript instead of an explanation why people care more about its expanding universe than someone dinking around in Rust, then you're making two mistakes.
Please do not label other’s different of interpretation as interpretation mistakes: I believe your opinion is factually wrong.
Happy to alleviate some of your ignorance by typing more slowly.
I buy ads.
I can get access to devices anywhere in the world, do network testing, and on the last mile which is cost prohibitive for any other distribution channel.
> Please do not label other’s different of interpretation as interpretation mistakes
Then don't be wrong.
Actually I prefer to ignore your practices.
> Then don’t be wrong.
Whatever, the pound for you if that makes you happy.
However, the fact that it is linked to HTML and DOM make it very easy to have immediate feedback without installing any tooling or IDEs.
But then, modern JavaScript is quite different from what one can learn just by using the devtools. I think that once one starts to use more advanced js tooling, things get quite worse than in almost any other language.
If we compare pure Node with Python then I think python is better for learning as it has less weirdness to it.
You are right though. Such comparison is only useful as a mental exercise as in the real world the browser and js are intimately tied.
There are satellites running javascript?
Rust isn't a new machine: It's the same old dumb machine, with some extra manoeuvres that make things "safe" (except when you say "unsafe"). It's not even remotely interesting to anyone who isn't troubled frequently enough by those things that need more safety.
JavaScript on the other hand, is a new machine: It's the most widely distributed networked machine we have, and it's amazing for that.
- You can buy cpus anywhere in the world by putting an ad out there that runs JavaScript and pipes the results back to you.
- You can build and deliver robust software that "runs" on such a wide variety of terminals including desktop workstations, servers, "phones", televisions, wristwatches, entertainment tablets, refrigerators, space satellites, and so on.
- Anybody can learn it. It is so much more inviting and accessible than anything that came before it that people feel very few real barriers to entry.
- It's fast "enough". I work in HPC - massive teraabyte-ram workstations building applications where we need to respond with bids in microseconds, disk seeks are counted for writes, and so on, so whilst there are still some things close to my heart that JavaScript isn't fast enough for, it's fast enough for everything else. Managers love this stuff.
Seeing our favourite applications running on JavaScript paints clearer a world where we can do fantastic new things. People love seeing "X in JavaScript" because they are seeing "X for the future" and the future is cool!
Porting a version control system to rust doesn't: At best, we find additional protection from a specific class of bug. Maybe it's exciting to people who are already excited about rust, but anyone that thinks these things are even remotely the same need to get their head examined.