4 ms·
Actually, Simpson in his "you don't know JS" series of books makes a statement against "Javascript: the good parts". The main argument is that it's actually "Ja
by kabes 10y ago
Actually, Simpson in his "you don't know JS" series of books makes a statement against "Javascript: the good parts". The main argument is that it's actually "Javascript: the easy parts". So crockford basically says "Just don't use the things most people find confusing when starting with JS". Instead, Simpson argues it's better to understand the language thoroughly so you can use all of its features to your advantage.
- davnn 10y agoI believe the truth lies somewhere in between. You will have a really rough time programming JS with the good parts only, but you will also have a rough time annoying your colleagues when you are the only one using "this" in a place where it's considered a bug by most people.
- LrnByTeach 10y ago@davnn you said it well. Most of the Javascript "Bad Reputation all these years" comes from the Language designed 20 years ago and did not change much mainly due to the fact that it is linked to ALL Browser vendor support at the SAME TIME ( to make any webpage JS to work). Assume a senario like where Ruby/Python could not change for last 20 years from their version 0.5 Now with ES6 and Babel Translator everybody can write ES6 code ( with out OLD JS BAD parts ) and enjoy JS as a true high level language like Ruby/Python . http://es6-features.org/#ClassInheritance http://es6-features.org/#ClassInheritance http://es6-features.org/#ClassInheritance http://es6-features.org/#ClassInheritance