> for me it remains a badly conceived language, A technical debt that penalises the progress of browsers and mobile phones Personally I'd say it has some frust

> for me it remains a badly conceived language, A technical debt that penalises the progress of browsers and mobile phones Personally I'd say it has some frustrating quirks, but it's possible to write good quality code in JavaScript. Modern JavaScript has many good features, as its evolution has been managed well, but it's up to the programmer to avoid the (many) bad parts. > I am deeply convinced that sooner or later it will be replaced by some interpreted language that is more consistent and less error prone I agree that it's possible to build less error-prone languages. There are plenty of these already. There's no chance of web browsers adding native support for a JavaScript-killing language, though. Google tried this with Dart, and failed. We already have the option of transpiling various languages to JavaScript and/or WASM. Dart and TypeScript both compile to JavaScript, for example. So far though, none of these languages have seriously threatened JavaScript's dominance.