Libraries like jQuery abstract the DOM more than anything else, no? The DOM is what people paper over. They want a better API for traversal, filtering, events,

Libraries like jQuery abstract the DOM more than anything else, no? The DOM is what people paper over. They want a better API for traversal, filtering, events, manipulation (incl. CSS), and so on. In that light, you might actually want a language where higher-order functions are possible. Also, it's a bit contradictory to argue that you could replace JS with any programming language and simultaneously argue that JS is garbage. In fact, if you simply swapped in Ruby, your argument would be largely the same; you'd still be stuck with the DOM and CSS. JS isn't a perfect language. The latest disappointment for me is the lack of any well-defined module or namespace system; it forces people into ad-hoc solutions when Python, Ruby, or other dynamic languages have pretty good systems. But there's nothing egregiously bad about the language, at least IMHO. What the author really seems to hate is web development, including CSS and the DOM, and probably the fact that they hardly have any choice. (Not coincidentally, I suspect this is why many people have problems with JS. I am sympathetic.) I suppose something nuanced like that makes for a less linkbait-y headline, however.