A project depending on a nuanced difference in syntax wouldn't be a problem for me. I already know 30 languages where 30% are just a difference in syntax from the "core", so adding another one isn't a problem.
I do agree with Ben Halpern's comment about stable tech, learning a piece of tech that is currently very unstable can be a waste of my time; unless I'm actually interested in helping the tech become more stable.
I find that many people are too stuck in their current stack and are way too resistant to changing to a new one. Their problem will be that eventually their favorite stack will become "old school" and the new stuff will be in a new stack ... which means that these people will be relegated to doing maintenance or working on the legacy codebase.
Remember: Coding is a large slow moving stream with rapids, you either move with it and adapt, or it washes over you and you drown.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
A project depending on a nuanced difference in syntax wouldn't be a problem for me. I already know 30 languages where 30% are just a difference in syntax from the "core", so adding another one isn't a problem.
I do agree with Ben Halpern's comment about stable tech, learning a piece of tech that is currently very unstable can be a waste of my time; unless I'm actually interested in helping the tech become more stable.
I find that many people are too stuck in their current stack and are way too resistant to changing to a new one. Their problem will be that eventually their favorite stack will become "old school" and the new stuff will be in a new stack ... which means that these people will be relegated to doing maintenance or working on the legacy codebase.
Remember: Coding is a large slow moving stream with rapids, you either move with it and adapt, or it washes over you and you drown.