Does Crockford "like" OG JavaScript? He's most famous for writing a book that shits on how much of the language should be ignored and avoided. To be fair, a lot

Does Crockford "like" OG JavaScript? He's most famous for writing a book that shits on how much of the language should be ignored and avoided. To be fair, a lot of that was right, but it's far from comprehensive for the language we have today. Seems like despite another decade of improvements on the language The Good Parts lives on in the minds of readers as something relevant today-- while a new treatise on The Good Parts of modern JS is not present. There are definitely parts of JS today that should be discarded, like "var", but The Good Parts cannot help you with that, because when it was written you could not discard it, as there was no other option. I've seen developers make complete messes of codebases that when using modern JS features would be mostly trivial, and they hide behind The Good Parts to justify it. And this includes suggesting that classes are somehow bad, and avoiding them in favor of POJOs and messily bound functions is preferrable despite JS not receiving a dedicated class concept until years after The Good Parts was published...