>>It's an empty statement that could apply to almost any development language no matter how objectively 'good' or 'bad' it is. No, it isn't really contentless.

>>It's an empty statement that could apply to almost any development language no matter how objectively 'good' or 'bad' it is. No, it isn't really contentless. All really complex systems will have ... well, less than perfect parts. That goes for programming languages in (at least) a subset of their use cases. You can either live in denial of "cruft" when choosing programming language or accept that you need to enforce a standard of best practices in your group. Then you evaluate languages with how they works if the best practices are followed. JavaScript's "good parts" -- and bad -- are well documented and discussed, most everyone knows about this subject. The overhead of designing/teaching and following those "best practices" needs to be factored into the equation too, of course. It might e.g. be too much of a pain for the std library of PHP (example chosen because I don't know PHP enough to have an opinion.)