Are you saying that you prefer babashka to zuo? Have you actually used zuo? Or did you only want to pontificate on another project with a potentially related goal, but without actually connecting those dots for readers of your comment?
My issue (not quite the right word, but close enough) with this kind of comment is it's kind of rude, in my opinion? Like, imagine if you were standing around with some people, and somebody said "I just learned about Zuo! It's this neat Racket alternative that's very small. It's a super cool project, and I've really enjoyed it!" And you reply with "When I want a small Lisp, I use babashka." And you don't connect it to the conversation at hand, and it's up to the other people to figure out what your point is. It's like... it's almost a non sequitur, in some sense. And comments like these seem super common here for some reason. It just kinda rubs me the wrong way, though I guess judging by their prevalence they are not seen this way by most people here, so perhaps my perception is in the wrong.
Hmm maybe I should try to read them that way and I'd be less bothered. Still, I wish they would actually explicitly say as much. It's only a few words, but (in my opinion) it feels like it completely shifts the tone from "the tool this article is about is useless, use this other tool instead" to an educational/helpful thing, which is much nicer.
As another person said of themselves, I like the fact that people on HN point to other tools they use in a way that is related to the one being discussed in the comments. That makes HN a good place to find out about tools you hadn't heard of.
I didn't think the original comment was intended to be dismissive of zuo, but they were just pointing out their preference for a tool in that vein (which made sense to me since both are lisp-ish languages made for shell scripting).
If the parent commenter had said, e.g., "Zuo seems to have chosen to do X to address issue Foo, but this other tool took approach Y instead, and I like that better" — well that seems a lot more constructive, and on-topic. But just saying "I use <other tool>" is like... it doesn't belong. It's off-topic, in a way? Not strictly speaking, but enough so that it makes me a bit uncomfortable. It gives me vibes of, like... questioning the subject tool's "right to exist", so to speak, because "why would I use <tool the article is about> when I already know <other tool>!" without actually showing any effort to understand the differences.
I dunno if I'm explaining my thoughts here well. It's not a huge deal, and I definitely have also found some of these comments to be useful in the past, but their general tone rubs me the wrong way just slightly and I thought maybe it was worth commenting on.
If I'm working on one project for some time I'll write a throwaway bb.edn with tasks for things I need to do often, for example to monitor a kubernetes pod, log it, and hit certain API endpoints. Then when I'm in the project directory I can just run `bb tsj` (e.g. test sign job).