This is true, if all of your developers are high-school students.

Or, you know, you could also look at the countless examples of successful large-scale deployments node.js has enjoyed in its relatively short life, not just passing-comments from random co-workers, if you're going to form a hasty, poorly-informed, opinion. It's still not a great way to evaluate a technology, but it sure beats a couple passing comments!

I looked at node.js on the server myself, and decided that it wasn't well-suited to our needs. That doesn't mean it's horrible or useless, just that it's not better than what we have now for our specific needs. There are a lot of big-names out there with smart people making technical decisions who disagree with your unnamed colleagues off-hand assessments, which have found a lot of success using node.js. I can only assume it's because node.js was better for their needs than whatever it was they were using before. Perhaps your developer friends just suck at evaluating new tools?

That's really the #1 reason applications have been trending toward the web for nearly a decade: Easy deployment.

When did either of those things happen? Wishful thinking?

Oh, that failed a long time ago. Why people keep using it is beyond me. At least people learned to stop using it on mobile.

Yeah, the guys at PayPal, eBay, Microsoft, Yahoo, Uber, NYT, Dow Jones, LinkedIn, (the list goes one) must be idiots.

I thought the same thing for years. Then I took the time to actually learn the language. My opinion changed dramatically.

I would have said the same thing. The lesson I learned: Just because I've used a language for years doesn't mean I know anything about it.

ORM? That's a blast from the past!

Has any significant progress been made in the last 15 years? Last time I checked, there were some pretty significant problems still left unsolved.

Well, it's true. Most people don't understand event-driven programming -- many node advocates included.

Remember when you first discovered lisp and learned about functional programming? It's a lot like that, it just appears easier on the surface, misleading many middle-of-the-road developers in to thinking they've got it all figured out after a quick tutorial.

I've said this 1000 times before: Everyone writes bad code. Just look at anything you've done a year or so ago (something you haven't looked at in a while).

There isn't really such a thing as a crap CPA. There's a pretty objective correct and incorrect there.

When people say "six-figures" they don't generally count the two after the decimal point.

Wait, are you one of those guys that thinks Python is "easy to read" because of forced indentation? I haven't seen them around in a while; I figured they all just forgot how to breath one day...

More seriously, doesn't your editor have a pretty-print function? Did it magically make code "easy to read" when you used it on some badly formatted code in other languages?

You do realize that Python's implicit blocks actually broke the language, right? Why do you think anonymous functions are crippled? Do you think it's because Guido likes making bad choices, or because he was too short-sighted to see how that decision could harm his language later?

Implicit blocks are bad, for many reasons which I'm sure you've already heard. The problems don't just affect developers, mind you, but the language as well. They're the sole reason why anonymous functions in Python are so horribly crippled, for example.

The only reason Nim includes this retardation is that it's written by a guy convinced that the ridiculous mistake Guido made was actually a good idea. I get it: you like Python. Here's the thing, you like Python in spite of the ridiculous white space rules, not because of them. You've spent so many years defending that absurd design decision that you've convinced yourself that it's actually good.

Oh, BTW, with a sensibly designed language, just about every editor out there can format code properly with a single keystroke. The only possible argument in favor of Pythons implicit blocks, forcing idiots to indent their code, is essentially meaningless.

You're selling yourself short. Perhaps start with something simpler? (I've seen "I just can't do it" students succeed after just a few days playing with Microsoft's Small basic or events in RPG Maker VX Ace Lite.) Once you've got the basics down, everything else is a cake-walk.

I've said this before: Everyone writes crap code. Just look at anything you did a year or so ago. Your first thought will undoubtedly be "what was I thinking!"

The best advice I got when I started grad school, many years ago: "There are no good writers, only good re-writers." I've found that to be true for programming as well as academic writing.

Indeed. I blame the flood of autodidacts coupled with a society that treats people who can write computer programs as super-geniuses. It's hard enough for the average autodidact to be self-critical, particularly when everyone around them is busy telling them that they're amazing. A solid formal education usually knocks that arrogance out of you. (MD's excepted. They've somehow found a way to remain arrogant pricks.)

I disagree. I know quite a few seasoned developers who couldn't pass an undergrad intro to logic class. Hell, I doubt half the autodidacts around here couldn't get past the section on Boolean algebra in CS101, despite a successful career in software.

I think when you say "logic" you really mean "critical thinking". Programming certainly helps with that, but so could countless other subjects. It's just easier to transfer those skills through programming.

Only to your job security.

We all know that programming is ridiculously simple, and that anyone with a bit of time and effort can learn relatively quickly on their own. That's terrifying to some folks, particularly those used to being treated like a genius just because they possess that particular skill.

Diversify your skill-set a bit so you don't have to live in fear. You'll be a lot happier.