I've heard arguments that different langs were adopted by companies that became huge and had financial incentive to scale the language and build tools. FB with PHP for example. Twitter abandoned Ruby so it hasn't yet benefited from big co putting tons of full timers on it.https://twitter.com/b0rk/status/960614183598518272 …
Yeah. I'd love to learn more about what the calculation was for devs at FB when deciding to do HHVM.
-
-
yeah!! To me this seems like a much smaller investment than HHVM, I think a team of 2 people could make a huge difference
-
Absolutely. How many people are actually exclusively full time on Ruby core after all? 4? Take a look at contributors to ruby static/dynamic analysis tools your company depends on. Probably zero full timers. Anyone full time on OSS can have incredible impact.
-
I also wonder whether part of this can be solved with a different approach than expecting one co to foot the bill for an OSS full timer. Look at what
@TheLarkInn has done to get funding for Webpack. Does anyone else hustle like he does for OSS funding? He's made a huge difference -
Truth. :) We are now at a place where we are in demand of FT/PT contributors also. But tldr the bottom line is seeking out the companies who value and rely heavily on the tooling/infrastructure. It just turns out webpack is pretty heavily depended on.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.