3 ms·
I think this is because you're interpreting it as "Javascript is bad" instead of "Javascript is bad for this purpose." I think there are plenty of places where
by nkozyra 12y ago
I think this is because you're interpreting it as "Javascript is bad" instead of "Javascript is bad for this purpose." I think there are plenty of places where the latter is a totally logical statement that needs no real further explanation.
- thomasfoster96 12y agoThe article probably should have removed any ambiguity on the way it could have been interpreted. An explanation as to why javascript isn't a good language choice would have been even better.