I think we're saying that you may not be able to form a proper orchestra or even a good, successful band that can stay together for many years with only the one instrument that you like most. If you are building a monolithic app, you do have to choose one language to build it in. But you could choose wrong. Or the choices could merely isolate you from other talented musicians that you'd otherwise be happy to play with. If you learn to play their instrument, even just superficially; it will help you expand your understanding of the entire problem space if you did learn to play together.

(The problem space... of music theory. Or programming. Or "just writing our app" but in a way that generates reusable modules that are constrained to be small, well-defined in terms of types and functionality, and easy to test.) And learning to play the instruments all together in some kind of harmony, one that you can even type check, is just... chefs kiss

Some people think Ruby is the wrong choice, and others are building successful businesses on it as a foundation. Did they make this choice because of subjective tastes, or for practical reasons?

(And you can do this with Wasm, implement compilers in your Ruby framework in a way that's fairly unobtrusive, to take advantage of apps that were compiled in another language that isn't C... and likely to net you some type of benefits if not performance benefits – but the constraints are interesting. Did I mention that Wasm doesn't seem to have a string type, unless you count WASI?)

I mentioned Ruby because I'm giving a lightning talk on this topic this week Tuesday at GitOpsCon and a bigger talk at OSS Summit (one on Wednesday and another on Thursday...)

It's called "Exotic Runtime Targets"

Ruby and Wasm on Kubernetes and GitOps Delivery Pipelines

There's also "Microservices and WASM, Are We There Yet?"