In my opinion, a language solution cannot be made regardless of a larger development and implementation platform. This is implied by what James Conigliaro wrote , as well as what jonnii wrote , but didn’t invoke it on purpose,
In making this decision, people often use unreasonable relative weights for different evaluation criteria. For example, one of the criteria might be “works on iPhone.” But if you're not really developing an iPhone, you don't care.
"Productivity" is another criterion that can gain unreasonable weight. Today, most Intel-based servers, which cost $ 2,000 without storage, quickly support a fairly large volume of website, regardless of your choice of language. If your load exceeds the one that can be run on the same server (do not assume!), Or if you need to split the server between different workloads, then the primary may become more important. But usually your application load will fit into a field with 1 server.
The development environment, including the IDE, as well as source control, configuration management and bug tracking - I think you can name the material of the application life cycle - is more important, in my opinion, than the language itself.
Another aspect that you might want to consider is to pull the language itself onto the developers for your team. In the early days of Java, you could attract developers by simply saying, "We do this in Java." Now this phenomenon has largely disappeared for Java, but in pockets this may be true for other languages and platforms. This factor may or may not be important to you.
source share