I disagree with the Javascript hate here, and the author is missing the point. JS is (at least until ECMA6 rolls in) a small, tidy language. It's got some bad

I disagree with the Javascript hate here, and the author is missing the point. JS is (at least until ECMA6 rolls in) a small, tidy language. It's got some bad parts, but at its core it is quite manageable. It's useful precisely because it ignores a lot of the implementation details that make languages like C or Rust more performant. I'm sick of people saying "JS is bad hurr durr let's replace it with $PREFERRED_HIPSTER_LANGUAGE". The real problem is that stupid people write javascript, lazy people write docs for javascript, and academic people write language extensions. What happened to C++ and made it a mudball is what is slowly happening to JS, and what will eventually happen to Rust if it gains any traction. Instead of replacing asm.js, we should look at a dedicated and simple programming environment for all browsers that care about performance-critical code. That environment should be specified as a machine, and then left the hell alone until some major change in technology alters the computer engineering therein. That way, people can program the performant bytecode in whatever they want (ASM.js, Rust, D, C, Clojure). The thing we really need to be doing is encouraging more conservatism in our work and tools: fewer and better languages, fewer and better libraries, more and better documentation. You know, what any other field might consider engineering. EDIT: On a related note, the W3C and WHATWG and Khronos folks should all only be allowed to propose things every three years, with all voting done in 6 months. And then limited to adding 2-3 features, tops. Similar for the JS and IETF folks. This is absurd: spend some time enjoying the fruits of your labors before adding more shit that compounds the complexity of working developers' lives!