Echo JS 0.11.0

It's just two parts and honestly I'm quite puzzled the author keep forgetting them. They're also borrowed from other languages.

Polymer is a fully-fledged library that falls back to polyfills when certain features aren't available.
ES2015 classes are not "mandatory", but sugar is... well, sweet. Actually, most of ES6's features could be transpiled to ES5: arrow functions, the spread operator, default arguments, even `let` and `const`. Are those superfluous just for that? No, we're going to use them because achieving the same result with ES5 is just annoying/boring/cumbersome.

Incidentally, `class` is one of those features that can *not* be completely transpiled to ES5. Native elements were just an example, but we also cannot correctly extend `Error` or `Array` with ES5.
Therefore, `class` isn't going away any time soon, and while JavaScript will keep evolving as a functional programming language, for those uncommon cases where classes are needed `class` could and will be used every time they're more convenient than the good old `function` pattern, as long as  we're aware that ES2015's classes aren't anything like "classic" classes.
But then again, every language has its own perks, so as mindful developers we're going to learn the differents like the pros we are.

So far, I had very little use for classes in JavaScript in general (lately I've been using them mainly for React), but things may change.
The next step for classes in JavaScript is defining a way to deal with composition nicely. Nothing is really ready, but the word "trait" is resonating among the community. Let's wait and see.

`class` brings a lot of problem, but they're mostly "philosophical" and go over the mere word.

Moreover, if you want to deal with certain kind of things (custom elements, for example) you have to use classes, period. And you definitely need `class`, which both solves some problems and it's a base for future language development.

...
Seriously?

Fair enough, the author is indeed male.
No need to use the genderless pronoun.

If you want yourself banned, that's the spirit.

There's literature from C# about abortion/cancelation of promises with throwing a special kind of errors turned out to be a mess.

For this reason, the ongoing rationale about cancelable  promises (https://github.com/tc39/proposal-cancelable-promises) focuses on cancel tokens, a new throwable class and even a new clause for `try`.

That being said, the title of the news and the gist is deceptive: requests aren't actually aborted, only ignored. The client will eventually get a response from the server.

Nevermind those clumsy developers that included a built-in module in their package.json, but how could they have allowed a package name "fs" in the first place?
I am baffled that they don't have a list of reserved package names.

It's also quite biased to a Chinese point of view.

"Variable name validation can get tricky"

Huh, maybe, but the essential point is: what did you do to put yourself in the need of such non-trivial validation, and why?
Unless you're writing a Javascript minifier, that is.