(A great thing about HN is getting to talk with the authors directly) I didn't recognise that you were talking chiefly about javascript. It is true that my exa

(A great thing about HN is getting to talk with the authors directly) I didn't recognise that you were talking chiefly about javascript. It is true that my example doesn't apply here. Ok, then I would make one comment (and edit my first comment). I would avoid the discussion of simultaneity at the start 'Events in parentheses happen “simultaneously”. In practice they happen at slightly different times, but separated by only a couple of nanoseconds, so people understand them to be simultaneous. Events (c1c2) are called glitches and sometimes considered a problem because one would expect only c2 to happen.' Because you are working in a single threaded simultaneous events just don't exist. The glitches you describe occur completely independently of timing, nanoseconds or otherwise. Drawing up diagrams where events occur at the same time is adding complexity which doesn't exist. errors ---e1-------e2--------------- userActions -u1------u2------------u3---- analyticsMessages ---e1u1--(e1u2 e2u2)---e2u3-- errors ---e1----e2------------------ userActions -u1----------u2--------u3---- analyticsMessages ---e1u1--(e2u1 e2u2)---e2u3-- Both of these scenarios produce glitches (as I understand it). So we don't need any notion of 'simultaneous events' to create them. Anyway - that is nitpicking. I enjoyed your article. I agree that the scenario described at top does not apply in javascript. I too strongly dislike callbacks :)