Here’s a blog post from a former employer, which might give you some arguments (just change Clojure(script) for Scala) https://blog.iterate.no/2013/04/18/economies-of-scala/

As a manager (which I’m currently not) I’d be worried about how hard it would be to hire clj/cljs devs. In practice this has not been a problem for us, at least not on the clj/backend side.

One area I would be worried about is the frontend of the frontend positions, ie, the frontend who know how to make beautiful UI’s. I’m not sure that the intersection of people interested in cljs and people capable of making pretty/good UI’s is very large.

for some reason this "who hard is to hire people" is coming up all the time. For anyone worried about this, I would like them to read into the history of taylorism and more recently, digital taylorism

@ashnur That would seem to mesh well with large corporates hiring armies of interchangeable (and mediocre) Java developers, yes?

I am not saying mediocre since that is a value judgement that everyone should do themselves. What skills they expect from their colleagues or employees is their job.

but interchangeable is the key, yes. The "productions process" is independent of the worker, which, honestly I think should be a red flag to anyone who likes to create anything.

Fungible then, rather than "mediocre".

And, yes, I agree this sort of thinking should be a red flag.

Software is a creative process, not a mechanical one. It's why "software engineer" is a bit of a misnomer: software is still not an "engineering discipline" (and perhaps it never will be?).

I would like to disagree about the mechanical, creative distinction. The original ship builder mechanics who were replaced by taylorism were very creative, but the work was not standardized. Now we can create a much more robust society with standards, but there is little creative process in building anything.

There should be some (fuzzy) line where this kind of reasoning makes sense. Would you want to hire engineers that agree to use only a language they themselves have created and that has existed for a month?

I would like to see software people not define themselves by the language they use

any true “engineering” is perhaps a creative process; in more strict terms, any NP-complete problem is perhaps a “creative” process (until proven otherwise) 🙂

because that's not really the important part of (my) job.

heh, np-complete is not creative enough for me. Creative is when you do something entirely new. Like writing a novel, painting a picture, growing tomatoes 😄

I guess those would be NP-hard, if I have my complexity theory terminology right 😉

I was hesitant because it’s embarrassing but I posted this on reddit. https://www.reddit.com/r/Clojure/comments/gwc1hf/borrow_copy_of_web_development_with_clojure_third/