It's interesting. One of the common reactions I've heard to my recent writings about polyglot programming is something I really don't understand. Actually, I've heard the same objection to other persons writing about polyglot.
The objection is that just because I propose polyglot programming - using several different programming languages for different purposes in the same system - I can use whichever language
and as such should not try to find better languages or say that certain languages are bad.
But that's really a confounding of the issue. Just because I can use any language in the dynamic layer doesn't mean I should. In fact, just because polyglot programming as a strategy means you will use more than one language, it is even more important to be careful and use the best languages available for the task. Which is why I'm working to improve JRuby, why I'm evaluating Scala as a replacement for Java, why I'm working on a language based on Io. It's all about using the best languages. I may be a polyglot, but I'm definitely not a panglot or omniglot.