This is the problem inherent in web dev I suspect. JS developers thought they reached the zenith of programming because they had a type system and could realize some gains via strong typing checks applied to what would otherwise be network calls.

However, at a certain point, you're better off not writing a web app anymore, just an app with a somewhat wonky, imprecise runtime, one that lacks any sort of speed and has many drawbacks.

And you lose one of the most fundamentally important parts of the web, interop. I'm sure other langs can be made to speak your particular object dialect, however the same problems that plague those other type systems will still plague yours.

Which circles back to my issue, no, sticking your head in the sand and proclaiming nothing else exists, does not, in fact, make things better.

> Next.js tightly couples your front-end and back-end, no question.

I'd question that statement, since it's wrong. There's no requirement to connect your NextJS server to your backend databases, you can have it only interact with your internal APIs which are the "real backends". You can have your NextJS server in a monorepo alongside your APIs which are standalone projects, and Next could exist solely to perform optimized payloads or to perform render caching (being the head of a headless CMS). It seems like a weird choice to make but you could also build almost a pure SPA have have Next only serve client components. The tightness of the coupling is entirely up to the implementor.

I don't use next.js really any more. That's exactly what I do.

HTML is not a programming language. But yes, I don't write much HTML anymore.

The issue with mixing languages is that they have different data models, even simple things like strings and integers are different in Python and JS, and the differences only increase the more complex the objects get.

Sometimes I write some code and I realise that this code actually needs to execute on the client instead of the server (e.g. for performance) or the server instead of the client (e.g. for security). Or both. Using one language means that this is can be a relatively simple change, whereas using two different languages guarantees a painful rewrite, which can be infectious and lead to code duplication.