Stack Overflow Survey Finds Developers Like Rust, Python, JavaScript and Remote Work (infoworld.com) 97
For Stack Overflow's annual survey, "Over 73,000 developers from 180 countries each spent roughly 15 minutes answering our questions," a blog post announces:
The top five languages for professional developers haven't changed: JavaScript is still the most used, and Rust is the most loved for a seventh year. The big surprise came in the most loved web framework category. Showing how fast web technologies change, newcomer Phoenix took the most loved spot from Svelte, itself a new entry last year.... Check out the full results from this year's Developer Survey here.
In fact, 87% of Rust developers said that they want to continue using Rust, notes SD Times' summary of the results: Rust also tied with Python as the most wanted technology in this year's report, with TypeScript and Go following closely behind. The distinction between most loved and most wanted is that most wanted includes only developers who are not currently developing with the language, but have an interest in developing with it.
Slashdot reader logankilpatrick writes, "It should come as no surprise to those following the growth and expansion of the Julia Programming Language ecosystem that in this year's Stack Overflow developer survey, Julia ranked in the top 5 for the most loved languages (above Python — 6th, MatLab — Last, and R — 33rd)."
And the Register shares more highlights: Also notable in the 71,547 responses regarding programming languages was a switch again between Python and SQL. In 2021, Python pushed out SQL to be the third most commonly used language. This year SQL regained third place, just behind second placed HTML /CSS.
And the most hated...
Unsurprisingly, developers still dread that tap on the shoulder from the finance department for a tweak to that bit of code upon which the entire company depends. Visual Basic for Applications and COBOL still lurk within the top three most dreaded technologies.
The operating system rankings were little changed: Windows won out for personal and professional use, although for professional use Linux passed macOS to take second place with 40 percent of responses compared to Apple's 33 percent. Most notable was the growth of Windows Subsystem for Linux, which now accounts for 14 percent of personal use compared with a barely registering 3 percent in 2021.
But SD Times noted what may be the most interesting statistic: Only 15% of developers work on-site full time. Forty-three percent are fully remote and 42% are hybrid. Smaller organizations with 2-19 employees are more likely to be in-person, while large organizations with over 10k employees are more likely to be hybrid, according to the survey.
InfoWorld delves into what this means: "The world has made the decision to go hybrid and remote, I have a lot of confidence given the data I have seen that that is a one-way train that has left the station," Prashanth Chandrasekar, CEO of Stack Overflow told InfoWorld.
Chandrasekar says that flexibility and the tech stack developers get to work with are the most important contributors to overall happiness at work. "Many developers drop out of the hiring process because of the tech stack they will be working with," he said... Organizational culture is also shifting, and cloud-native techniques have taken hold among Stack Overflow survey respondents. Most professional developers (70%) now use some form of CI/CD and 60% have a dedicated devops function....
Lastly, Web3 still has software developers torn, with 32% of respondents favorable, 31% unfavorable, and 26% indifferent. Web3 refers to the emerging idea of a decentralized web where data and content are registered on blockchains, tokenized, or managed and accessed on peer-to-peer distributed networks.
In fact, 87% of Rust developers said that they want to continue using Rust, notes SD Times' summary of the results: Rust also tied with Python as the most wanted technology in this year's report, with TypeScript and Go following closely behind. The distinction between most loved and most wanted is that most wanted includes only developers who are not currently developing with the language, but have an interest in developing with it.
Slashdot reader logankilpatrick writes, "It should come as no surprise to those following the growth and expansion of the Julia Programming Language ecosystem that in this year's Stack Overflow developer survey, Julia ranked in the top 5 for the most loved languages (above Python — 6th, MatLab — Last, and R — 33rd)."
And the Register shares more highlights: Also notable in the 71,547 responses regarding programming languages was a switch again between Python and SQL. In 2021, Python pushed out SQL to be the third most commonly used language. This year SQL regained third place, just behind second placed HTML /CSS.
And the most hated...
Unsurprisingly, developers still dread that tap on the shoulder from the finance department for a tweak to that bit of code upon which the entire company depends. Visual Basic for Applications and COBOL still lurk within the top three most dreaded technologies.
The operating system rankings were little changed: Windows won out for personal and professional use, although for professional use Linux passed macOS to take second place with 40 percent of responses compared to Apple's 33 percent. Most notable was the growth of Windows Subsystem for Linux, which now accounts for 14 percent of personal use compared with a barely registering 3 percent in 2021.
But SD Times noted what may be the most interesting statistic: Only 15% of developers work on-site full time. Forty-three percent are fully remote and 42% are hybrid. Smaller organizations with 2-19 employees are more likely to be in-person, while large organizations with over 10k employees are more likely to be hybrid, according to the survey.
InfoWorld delves into what this means: "The world has made the decision to go hybrid and remote, I have a lot of confidence given the data I have seen that that is a one-way train that has left the station," Prashanth Chandrasekar, CEO of Stack Overflow told InfoWorld.
Chandrasekar says that flexibility and the tech stack developers get to work with are the most important contributors to overall happiness at work. "Many developers drop out of the hiring process because of the tech stack they will be working with," he said... Organizational culture is also shifting, and cloud-native techniques have taken hold among Stack Overflow survey respondents. Most professional developers (70%) now use some form of CI/CD and 60% have a dedicated devops function....
Lastly, Web3 still has software developers torn, with 32% of respondents favorable, 31% unfavorable, and 26% indifferent. Web3 refers to the emerging idea of a decentralized web where data and content are registered on blockchains, tokenized, or managed and accessed on peer-to-peer distributed networks.
Re:No, retards, quit with the rust [bleep] (Score:1)
Amazon has deep pockets, so they are a suspect.
Re:No, retards (Score:2, Insightful)
Some people are using it. These times are very similar to when Java came out. People have long been searching for the next big thing so you have a lot of people, especially inexperienced, that jump on bandwagons of doom. People like shiny things even when they're junk. Kids pull these things in to the corporate environment and set things up for a future of suck because it's too hard to undo all the mistakes.
Java turned out to be shit and Rust is shit too but that won't stop it from being integrated all over
Re: (Score:2)
How is Java shit? I mean, I've written lots of Java, I don't particularly like writing Java any more and tend not to do it. But, since it's inception it has expanded, become one of the most widely used languages in the world, and spawned a JRE which runs even more languages.
Your point about the rust compiler is true -- it's is quite slow and resource intensive. A significant part of that is spent on type checking but a much greater part in optimisation. The result of the latter is that Rust does not run slo
Re: (Score:1)
Java did not deliver what it was suppose to. It's main purpose was to be cross-platform and add security and it failed miserably. This was very visible in the early days if you ever tried to do cross-platform stuff and it just didn't work. Regular C/C++ code is more portable than Java. Next it was suppose to reduce bugs and security problems. Again failed miserably. Look through the CVE databases at Java security issues. It's no better than software done the "regular old way" except that it runs slower, use
Re: (Score:2)
You are correct about the original intention of Java (applets and the web!) is has not been a success. But it has been successful in enterprise and also on mobile with android. You also seem critical of Python and it's fate, but again, it is a widely used language, including in environments were high performance is required; Python just shunts the work onto C where it really matters. That might offend a sense of purity, but it works.
In terms of Rust and performance, the compiler front end is written in Rust
Re: (Score:2)
Java is pretty great for cross-platform compatibility, though. It also has a nice library (one of the first languages that was so complete). Overall, it's been a stunning success.
The primary complaint against Java, and it has been the complaint since the beginning, is that it's too verbose. It takes too long to type. Fortunately a modern IDE solves that problem. (And by "modern" I mean "since 2005").
Re: (Score:2)
If you need a super-duper environment to fix a language's issues, then that feels a bit like a band-aid to me. Especially if it disincentivizes from actually fixing that language. Also, things that are too verbose take not only a long time to write -- they also take a long time to read. Which is probably what one is going to be doing most of the time in the end. People usually end up reading more than writing in their lives, even outside of programming.
If one wants a nice, cross-plarform language without th
Re: (Score:2)
the vast majority of the compiler time is spent in LLVM which is written in C
It's actually in C++. But the point here is that the vast majority of useful work is actually being done in that LLVM code, so I don't see how you can used this as a counterargument. "Language A does job X in P seconds, while language B does job Y in Q seconds which is much more than P" is not a claim that convinces any sane person against using language B if jobs X and Y are completely dissimilar. Reimplement LLVM in Rust first and *then* you can make comparison on the basis of how slowly or quickly LLVM r
Re: (Score:2)
Well, just so. The Rust compiler is the only tool that compiles rust and that compiler is mostly written in C++, so it's not evidence of performance of rust or otherwise. It will be interesting to see how fast a GCC based compiler would be if and when that comes along.
It's never likely that we are going to see a side-by-side comparison of Rust vs C vs C++ in terms of compiler. Who is going to reimplement that whole stack just for that?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh look, an anonymous coward spouting shit about Java that is so full of holes that its clear they never even seen Java. Java is far more portable, as almost any Java program can run on any supported platform without recompilation. Tell me how many C/C++ programs that will work with. 10%?
Java is memory safe, eliminating the most dangerous category of bugs that every C/C++ program needs to deal with on a daily basis, and fail miserable at that. When memory bugs are found daily in some of the most scrutinized
Re: (Score:2)
C and C++ are portable though so you can just compile it for the needed platform. No problem.
C++ is memory safe if you don't manually malloc anything too, and RAII is a better way to manage resources including things that are not memory.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes but Java comes out with a new JRE version every week and old programs not running in new JREs.
Re: (Score:2)
Rust DOES run slow and use lots of resources though
The compiler does. Rust executables are right up there with C/C++ in performance and resource usage.
Re: (Score:2)
Pulled that straight out of your ass.
Re: (Score:2)
Java isn't bad. Or wasn't. It changed, it's now merely a glue language to tie together packages, rather than a code-from-scratch thing. Also it got corrupted by it's brief foray in web development. It did have good fundamentals, with smart people working on it, not a side project by a single designer like a lot of languages that become popular.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I use it. Today even.
You need to be able to think to use Rust; Google, while necessary, isn't sufficient. If you're a script money muddler assembling copypasta from StackOverflow or whatever you won't get far with Rust; if you work really hard you'll get to a few hundred LOC, find yourself in a horrible tangle of ownership and function coloring problems and surrender. I rather like that aspect of Rust; fake-it-to-make-it types are filtered out.
On the other hand, if you can think you're rewarded be re
Re: (Score:1)
I use it. Today even.
That fits. You're nobody. *ba-dum-tish*
You need to be able to think to use Rust; Google, while necessary, isn't sufficient.
Oh, I like that argument. I like it a lot. (Emphasis added.)
So, on the one hand, you're not strong-minded enough to do your own memory management because you use a one-trick-pony language that's supposed to find all the memory bugs in your code. On the other hand, you like to look down on those lesser beings who you assume simply lack the brain capacity for what you like to imagine is "thinking".
On the gripping hand, the language is so shitty you can't get by without
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that Rust is over-complicated.
It's a bad language wrapper around a good memory-management idea. We need a better wrapper.
Re: (Score:2)
99% chance you never wrote a line of Rust in your life.
Re: (Score:2)
99% chance you never wrote a line of Rust in your life.
A little more than a line but not much. It's a pretty horrible language with well-documented problems for learners. I don't do any systems programming so the silver bullet that Rust offers has very little value to me. So the cost/benefit ratio means that for me it's not worth the effort to grasp the terrible syntax.
Re: (Score:2)
So having written two lines of Rust you now feel comfortable spouting off about it on the internet. Got it.
Re: (Score:2)
So having written two lines of Rust you now feel comfortable spouting off about it on the internet. Got it.
I've written hundreds of thousands of lines of code in many other languages. I know a shitty syntax when I see one.
"Oh, you cycled three yards on our new 'spike' saddle and now feel comfortable spouting off about it on the internet. Got it.".
Fuck off, fanboi.
Re: (Score:2)
You're a poser bullshitter. Probably the only languages you code in are VB and javascript. You have no clue what destructuring is, much less that it has been adopted by C++. You're just a self infatuated loudmouth on the internet would would be a clear and present danger to any programming project you weaseled your way into.
Re: (Score:2)
You need to be able to think to use Rust; Google, while necessary, isn't sufficient. If you're a script money muddler assembling copypasta from StackOverflow or whatever you won't get far with Rust; if you work really hard you'll get to a few hundred LOC, find yourself in a horrible tangle of ownership and function coloring problems and surrender. I rather like that aspect of Rust; fake-it-to-make-it types are filtered out.
Honestly, that feels like exactly the kind of stuff one could say about C or C++. "It's not like Java, you have to actually *think* to make your C/C++ program not crash; script kiddies are filtered out". In none of those cases is it something to be proud of. Seriously, a language that makes you waste your cognitive capacity on meta-problems instead of solving your actual problems will absolutely detract from accomplishing more actual work. "I have to *think* to use X, so X is better" is not far from mindles
I had a good point (Score:1)
but the fucking desktop version of the site says you have to log in, then erases everything and sends you to the home page.
meanwhile the atrocious shit that is m.slashdot just asks you to sign in and take you back to the post you wrote, but proceeds to show you 95 page troll posts no matter what you set your browsing to
WTF assholes, its a page of text, surely you can figure it out
Web3 (Score:4, Insightful)
Web3 still has software developers torn, with 32% of respondents favorable
Meanwhile, 32% of developers either have no idea what web3 is, or are clueless.
Re:Web3 (Score:5, Funny)
Web3 still has software developers torn, with 32% of respondents favorable
Meanwhile, 32% of developers either have no idea what web3 is, or are clueless.
I'm pretty sure that 0% of anyone has an idea what web3 is but, that's all the more reason for the marketing department to love it. They can leverage its synergy.
Re: Web3 (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you work for Oracle?
python no thanks (Score:2)
I use python in my day job because we use a variety of languages. Honestly python is a "so so" language with shit performance and inconsistencies. In 2022, there still isn't a complete official language specification. When jython project started they tried to make it 100% compliant, but that's impossible. Lots of people have tried to make a faster python, but again no one can because there isn't an official spec.
python is fine as a bootstrap for running C/C++ code, but using it for things like ETL, GUI or h
Re: python no thanks (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Python has become the PHP of the 21st century, just like PHP replaced Visual Basic
Re: (Score:2)
I've been a professional Python developer for the past decade. Python is a GREAT general-purpose language:
1. Although an interpreted language is always going to be slower than a fully compiled language, Python IS fast, and it's only getting faster. Only recently it was announced that CPython 3.11 is getting a whooping 25% boost due to all the awesome optimisations in the upcoming release.
2. Python is actually classed as one of the best ETL languages due to it's versatility with data types.
3. There IS an off
Re: (Score:2)
1. Great! That means Python code won't take 50 times as long as Go code or 100 times as long as C/C++ code -- it will only be 40 to 75 times as slow, and still use way more memory! (Those baseline numbers were my experience with dealing with a particular binary file format.) See also reposurgeon's experience [ibiblio.org], and particularly the after-action report [ibiblio.org] on its intended job.
2. The versatility of Python's data types also leads people to do things like passing nonhomogenous tuples around and indexing them by in
Re: (Score:3)
"That document underspecifies the language".
That is true with many languages which have had language specifications for ever. C has quite a lot of undefined behaviour. And, while it is possible to write C that will compile with different compilers, often it does not. On top of this, a lot of the C ecosystem is unspecified. It has no standard build tool for instance. If you want to find all the files associated with a C program (header files and the iike), everyone uses the C compiler to tell them, but it is
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It works until somebody else needs to modify the code, and they spend more time trying to figure out the undocumented behavior than it would have taken to write and use a well-defined type in the first place.
I guess the joke was on the guy who thought that code would have given him job security.
Re: python no thanks (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is not (eventually) figuring out someone else's awful code. The problem is the net extra time it takes to do so. This was not code that I was ever responsible for -- it was "business logic" that ran on top of my code, and I made what should have been a minor API change to improve the correctness of the overall stack. But that required adjusting the Python code's bookkeeping, and the fact that it used index [1] in place of some named field meant that it was hard to find all the places that nee
Re: (Score:1)
I second this sentiment. I can figure out code, even when it's butt ugly with horrible docs. The annoying thing about python libraries is the horrible docs. It feels like some academic wrote the code, some post doc documented it and then said "good enough." End result is spaghetti code with inaccurate docs. It takes 5x more effort to untangle the mess while the customer is screaming "I want it last month."
To be fair, that can happen with any language. The biggest problem is python culture.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
LOL
A language reference isn't exactly the same as a specification. Have you read the language specification for Java, C#, SQL or any other language? Even with a language reference, a proper specification has a compatibility test kit. I'm not aware of any official language compliance test kit. At the end of the day, if other implementations can't run the libraries people need, there's an issue. I've written python GUI before, but honestly it sucks compared to mature frameworks. I'd rather write GUI in XCode
Re: python no thanks (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Check out pyqt, wxPython, tkinter, kivy or pyside.
This comment illustrates the problem with creating a GUI in Python: there isn't one native implementation, there are a dozen different non-native implementations, many of which require you to learn another programming language. And not just a different language: a different type of language - all of the frameworks I tried seem to be object-oriented languages, which still feel alien to me.
I dabble in Python. Writing a script is easy. Adding a GUI to it has always been an exercise in frustration for me. It fe
Re: (Score:2)
I use python in my day job because we use a variety of languages. Honestly python is a "so so" language with shit performance and inconsistencies.
I've used a bunch of python. I agree, I think it's so-so as well. I don't generally hate languages, that I find a very strange thing. I do find the amount of love that python gets a little mystifying. I find the lack of end-of-block markers to be a minor but continual source of friction.
Dynamic typing I generally find runs out of steam after a hundred lines or so,
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I've tried most of the alternatives that tries to improve on cpython. Guess what, they don't work on 100% of the libraries or even the stuff I needed. I'm supposed to be happy that 15 years of people bitching Guido finally decides "it's time for me to fix this broken record?"
there are things I dislike about javascript, sql, java, C# and every other languages I've used the last 20 years. How many times have people copy a piece of code from a search into a file and have python complain because of formatting?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I will admit I am a LISP/Prolog bigot.
I know the philosophy of python and have been around long enough. I was in college in the early 90's when python was created and lots of my friends were comparing Perl to python. Many of them preferred python over perl. I get why in that context. Perl is horrible to read and horrible to write. Even worse is the culture of "I can write everything in one line with perl".
I don't care if other people use python. Honestly I don't care if my customers make me use python. I'm
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
C++ programmers were too busy to vote (Score:5, Interesting)
C++programers were too busy coding to vote. Getting stuff done that runs the world (and all those other programing languages many of which are just fancy C++ programs)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Such squabbling is beneath the attention of people who can charge whatever they want per hour and get it because they're the only ones that can keep a multi-million dollar operation running.
Re: (Score:2)
The C++ programmers are too busy screaming "RAII!" at everyone around them. Pretty sure that's all they do.
JavaScript? (Score:1)
Blaspheme!
Re: (Score:2)
Strip out most of the ES6 crap and the 'new' keyword and you're left with an incredibly simple yet powerful and expressive language. It's actually pretty good, once you take the time to understand it.
There's a moment of enlightenment I've found people have once they understand why 'this' works the way it does.
Re: JavaScript? (Score:2)
The only consistency in JavaScript is that it's consistently hot garbage.
Re: (Score:2)
Says the guy who has no clue.
JavaScript has only one single flaw: type coercions that make no sense, like converting a string of letters into an int giving the length of the string, or inconsistent handling of nulls and false etc. (I don't know the exact problems).
Otherwise JS, and the languages based on it like CoffeeScript or Typescript are the only "pure OO" languages in common use, unlike Self etc.
If you do not like JS or EcmaScript: no one forces you to use it. But calling a language "hot garbage" when
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
$ node
Welcome to Node.js v16.15.0.
Type ".help" for more information.
> 0==1
false
> 1==1
true
> 1=="1"
true
> 1==="1"
false
> 1+1
2
> 1+"1"
'11'
> 0==false
true
> 1==true
true
> 2==true
false
> null==undefined
true
> null===undefined
false
> 0.1+0.2===0.3
false
> 0.1+0.2==0.3
false
> 0.1+0.2
0.30000000000000004
Re: (Score:2)
like converting a string of letters into an int giving the length of the string
That doesn't happen.
or inconsistent handling of nulls and false etc
Can you elaborate? The rules seem pretty sensible and consistent to me.
Otherwise JS, and the languages based on it like CoffeeScript or Typescript are the only "pure OO" languages in common use, unlike Self etc.
Interesting perspective. I'd agree that prototypal OO is the more powerful paradigm given that "class"ical OO is a subset, but I'm not sure why you think JS, CS, and TS qualify as "pure" but self does not? How are you defining "pure" here?
Re: (Score:2)
No, I can not elaborate. Google it.
There are completely idiotic coercions from strings to int's etc.
but self does not?
Self does also, was my sentence garbled? Ah, I meant "common use", Self is not in common use.
It is not really about prototypes anyway. In JavaScript you are not required to use prototypes, you can construct class like things in various ways.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I can not elaborate. Google it.
I know you can't. That's because you don't actually know what you're talking about.
There are completely idiotic coercions from strings to int's etc.
That you can't name... That's because they don't exist. (Just FYI, a string will never be coerced to an int.)
In JavaScript you are not required to use prototypes, you can construct class like things in various ways.
False. This shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the language. JavaScript does not have classes. The 'class' keyword, new with the absurdity that is ES6, is just sugar.
Re: (Score:2)
Strip out most of the ES6 crap
What's crap about ES6?
There's a bunch of useful bits of syntax, like const, and a bunch of handy extensions to the library. Looking at the list (I do a little JS, no general idea what is and isn't ES6) it looks like it removes a bunch of friction here and there.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of ES6 runs completely counter to the language proper. Arrow functions, for example, completely change the behavior of 'this'. It's not just a shorthand, using them fundamentally changes the language is a way that makes it significantly less useful. The 'class' keyword allows you to make something that looks like a class in languages like Java or C#, but works differently in non-obvious ways to people who don't already know the language as it's just sugar over the more powerful prototypal object sy
Re: (Score:2)
Ah OK, thanks for explaining.
I don't JS enough, and either do I really now the pre ES-6 world enough to appreciate the problems. Also I love C++ as a language, so features smooshed together slightly haphazardly is my jam.
I see what you mean about this. I mean from a somewhat external perspective, either choice make a degree of sense. Having both choices made though doesn't.
Re: (Score:2)
It's hard to take any survey seriously where the JS is in the top 3 most liked languages. It primarily shows that the kiddies filling in these surveys have discovered the F12 button.
Re: (Score:2)
JS is a nice language...
when you use TS on top of it and start treating it as C# or Java
Otherwise it sucks. But JS purists hate TS and put excuses not to use it. Their excuse is that "writing types everywhere takes too much time". I asked one of those people how does he deal with refactorings. He scoffed and said "types are not there to make sure you didn't break anything when you refactored stuff. That's what tests are for".
Enjoy covering 100% of your code with tests, I guess? Thanks, for making sure my in
makes sense (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: languages, people tend to enjoy the languages they don't have to do for work, because personal projects are more fun. If they had to fix bugs in other people's Rust code all day for some boringass middleware layer of microservice they'd probably associate the language with boring work.
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, 87% of Rust developers said that they want to continue using Rust,
8 out of the 9 people using Rust love it!
Used != liked (Score:1)
Stop Anthropomorphising work!
Incorrect (Score:2)
Why are the pay scales always wrong? (Score:2)
It seems like every time I see one of these the pay people get paid is always reported as too low to be realistic. I say this as a hiring manager and consultant who actually looks at this stuff professionally. People are getting paid a lot more than is being reported here. Its always so severely low when reported, it makes me think that they are trying to price fix.
Javascript?! (Score:2)
Which programmer in their right mind LIKES javascript?!
It's bloated, bug prone, and inefficient. On top of that the language doesn't even make sense.
Best bang for the buck timewise (Score:2)
But really (Score:2)
"Stack Overflow Survey Finds Developers Like Rust, Python, JavaScript and Remote Work"
Corrected headline:
"Stack Overflow Survey Finds Developers Are Happy With Any Language As Long As It's Remote Work"
Liked python (Score:1)
yeah (Score:1)
Bottom line, Angular Sucks (Score:1)
We hate Angular more than we hate Drupal. Survey results seem accurate based on that alone.
Re: (Score:1)
PostgreSQL (Score:1)