>>Javascript is by no means a good language My point was that you have to compare the practical use cases, that is "the good parts" of a language/framework --

>>Javascript is by no means a good language My point was that you have to compare the practical use cases, that is "the good parts" of a language/framework -- not the bad cruft you can avoid. A few hours investment is nothing. (JS still has problems, many are being solved.) This is trivial of course, but strangely ignored by many on HN with an IQ that probably is the sum of our two's... >>If you avoid languages that're used by idiots I wrote that I am suspicious of environments used by language war cultists, intelligence is orthogonal. (A typical example is someone that starts recommending his favorite environment even when it isn't discussed, as suitable for everything just by its std use cases... Like you :-) ) Edit: Absolutely agree, mercurial.