Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Because Python pays more. Or Javascript. Or Ruby.

But these are all implemented in C++ or C? Those aren't low-paying jobs.



But most implementors are hired by Big Techs, which means you have to be really good to get a decent job with C++.

In the meantime, JavaScript and Python is a lot easier to work with, with a higher salary.


> In the meantime, JavaScript and Python is a lot easier to work with, with a higher salary.

I don't know - I legitimately think programming languages are simpler than web applications. Mostly stateless, mostly a big pure function. Compared to the anarchy and chaos of web services seems easy.


> But these are all implemented in C++ or C?

Mostly, but Rust is increasingly replacing them.


Which of those languages are being rewritten in Rust?


I meant that increasing amount of projects related to Python/JS and others that would previously be created in C/C++ is now created in Rust. Some examples:

TypeScript type checker written in Rust Ruff – a fast Python Linter written in Rust Introducing Turbopack: Rust-based successor to Webpack Deno is a simple, modern and secure runtime for JavaScript, TypeScript, and WebAssembly that uses V8 and is built in Rust.


No one is paying the implementers of those languages


> No one is paying the implementers of those languages

Lol what? Yes they are. I literally work with a whole team of them! Teams at Goole, Apple, Mozilla, etc etc as well.


OK, few are actively recruiting for people on those projects, as a proportion of the whole job market. A few juicy jobs there and a huge pile of less well paying ones means that any average is going to be low. The existence of those roles is great for those that have/get them, but this doesn't help the wider pool who need to use other tech to get the better wages – a situation that results in fewer newly training in c++ because those outside the pool see the low average.


https://discuss.python.org/t/official-list-of-core-developer...

>In my latest talk, I computed that we have 2 developers paid at full time to maintain Python: I am full time, Barry, Brett, Eric, Steve and Guido have 1 day per week if I understood correctly.

Now from what I understand situation is way better, but still - that's what it looked like just three years ago, when Python already had millions of people writing code in it.


Sorry, 'no one' is clearly an exaggeration. "Not enough to affect the job market" is a better way of putting it.


You understand that it's the ratio and comparative numbers right? A single team of C++ developers creating that stuff can support infinity python programmers building on top


Yeah - but it's not 'no one'.


I'm not sure how being pedantic changes the perception, or state, of the industry.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: