DHH answers: What makes Rails a framework worth learning in 2017?

This answer sounds a lot like what Microsoft's answer to Java was. C#. Everything in this answer reminded me of c#.

Maybe a more relevant question is whether Rails is worth learning if you're looking for a job. Searching Indeed.com's API by title, which removes duplicates, there are currently 133 Rails jobs in the USA compared with 763 PHP (excl. WP, Drupal etc.) and 467 Node.js. In the UK there are 104 Rails jobs compared with 1013 PHP (excl. WP, Drupal etc.) and 230 Node.js. However, if you deleve deeper it turns out that half of the Rails jobs are in London. Outside the capital there are 22 PHP jobs to every Rails job (35 including WP, Drupal etc.) and 3 Node.js jobs to every Rails job so it would appear that unless you have a particular preference for the Ruby language Rails is not a good bet in today's job market.

See my top-level comment about this. Rails' presence in the job market is definitely declining and dwarfed by both PHP and Node.js.

Why on earth is Node considered the default for concurrency with its shitty single-threaded callback execution model? Anyone switching from Rails for improved concurrency would surely be better advised to choose Elixir?

I'll bite :-) Keep in mind that I don't mind using Ruby at all, and consider it historically a good incremental improvement over what we used to have. I'll happily code in Ruby any day.

ES5, for me, was a complete surprise because I wasn't really expecting to enjoy using it. Perhaps I let myself be unduly influenced by the crowds ;-).

Prototypical inheritance is surprisingly nice. It is a simple concept and it is obvious exactly what's going on under the hood (if you care to look ;-) ). It allows a lot of functionality without requiring a large amount of language syntax. Ruby, on the other hand, has a more complicated (perhaps one can say more sophisticated) system, but requires a lot of language features to implement. Things like method_missing and all of the meta programming features feel bolted on.

ES5 has this really nice core design where language features just pop out. So private accessibility is done simply by using closures, etc. You have higher order functions without the absolute craziness of procs and blocs. Even things like mixins and traits are incredibly easy to implement with a couple of lines of code. Ruby, on the other hand, is a kind of byzantine structure where everything is bolted on with C code and the language itself is rather inflexible.

I really like the idea in ES5 that classes are simply functions that return an object. Hooking up inheritance structure is a complete PITA, but conceptually the design is really clean. Even the idea that objects are simply hashes and that methods are simply functions in a hash is really nice. Even the weird this pointer is at least consistent (despite being practically useless).

Where ES5 gets its bad reputation is in type/data coercion (which it shouldn't do at all IMHO, and it certainly shouldn't do it the way it does it). It also has a truly awful standard library -- to the point where most experienced developers simply avoid it! My main other problem with ES5 is that it is overly verbose, but this is something I feel that is shared with Ruby in many ways.

IMHO, use of a transpiler is just a good idea with ES5 because while the core of the language is excellent, the stuff surrounding it is full of pitfalls. I personally like CoffeeScript quite a lot and honestly prefer writing CS to Ruby. Typescript seems like it is also quite nice, though I haven't used it. Lately I've been playing with Purescript and while it is legitimately a different language compiled into JS, I really enjoy reading the compiled JS output, because it often compiles into something very elegant.

Conclusion: Ruby is fine, but ES5 is just a lot more elegant internally and it is much easier for me to use it intelligently to produce nice code. Ruby has a much better standard library, but language features are bolted on without them being driven by an internal design. Basically, I think they think "Hey, this would be a convenient syntax. Let's write the C code to make that work." without really evaluating whether there is any internal consistency. Some people may actually consider that a plus, but I prefer simpler languages. Note that I feel that in many ways ES6 is wandering over in this direction and I am somewhat disappointed with it. I was happy you specified ES5 in your question, because a similar question about ES6 would have been harder for me to answer.