Languages have more characteristics than what can be reasonably included in a headline.

"Fast to run, but slow to compile and needs very new compiler, and may have a big-ish executable, but OTOH it won't cause much problems with installation of dependencies - vite compatible build tool"

It's a social filter:

- it brings the attention of people liking the tech

- it associates the tool with the values that come with the language and community

- it's a shortcut for explaining things you know most people will assume about the stack

I am not a huge fan either, but it's at least meaningful in the sense that well written and fast Javascript code is still at least a whole distinctive level slower than well written and fast native code. Other reasons to care about include, native code sometimes solves a class of deployment issues (single binary vs npm package). So while I don't care about Rust per se, the signal about it being compiled/native code is still alluring to me so I welcome this in the headline.

"Written in X" implies a number of potentially desired characteristics of a program.

> I’m an end user of a product, I couldn’t care less what time it takes to compile the final binary.

Then consider if HN is the right forum for you? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Your comment could be rephrased as:

  fn main() {
    println!("I really dislike trend of “written in X” in a headline. What difference does it make if a build tool is written in X? If X entails “fast, takes small amount of resources and reliable” - then just say so.");
  }