> Languages do have their respective idiomatic structure, you write JS differently than Java I object to this specifically as it relates to JS because the sort

> Languages do have their respective idiomatic structure, you write JS differently than Java I object to this specifically as it relates to JS because the sort of code that mainstream "JS" programmers write nowadays ends up being passed off as idiomatic even though it really shouldn't. If you look at well-written JS in very large JS codebases with high standards (like Firefox, at least as it was circa ten years ago, or Apple's Web Inspector[1]), then you realize idiomatic JS looks a lot more like Java, C#, and Objective-C than what you find getting pushed to GitHub today—and (very soon after) discarded, since the half-life of an NPM-powered codebase is something like 2–3 years. The problem is that the style of development associated with the NodeJS+NPM crowd has cannibalized the JS ecosystem, so almost anyone gazing in on the situation today is going to have a _very_ skewed view of what "idiomatic" means. The perverse thing is that you will encounter more of an impedance mismatch with JS-the-language if you actually try to follow the crowd. This is a big driver for toolchain/framework churn—because they're all fighting the language instead of just going with it. 1. https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/WebInspectorUI/search?l=javascript https://github.com/apple-oss-distributions/WebInspectorUI/se...