@ghurtado: JavaScript IS an OOP language. Its only that it uses the prototype paradigm, instead of the class-based paradigm, which is more common.
And JavaScript is NOT the only prototype-based OO language, but certainly is the more widespreaded one.
Most programmers were introduced to OOP using class-based languages, and once they start with JavaScript feel frustrated since the paradigm is different. But that does not mean prototype is in any way "bad" or "inferior".
All the opposite! Prototype is a very powerful paradigm and is quite easy to emulate the class-based paradigm with it. (That is the reason there are so many frameworks like this one, trying to make developers save the effort to learn the new paradigm)
In my humble opinion, I think developers should spend time studying and REALLY understanding how prototype work on JavaScript, instead of using libraries to make it look like Java or some other class-based language (yes, @israelidanny, I agree with you)
But of course, if using this kind of libraries is your cup of tea, is completely respectable.
Crockford has written several documents about it, like this one: http://yuiblog.com/blog/2006/11/13/javascript-we-hardly-new-ya/
While that site is great, is not directly related to JavaScript - EchoJS is not about general software-related news and projects, but for exclusively JavaScript news and projects - the rule states "JavaScript related content only"
You are not the only one Jeff, I also agree that "npmjs" certainly can make an non-official module look official.
That's what the CEO meant by confusing; is confusing in the sense of "it can confuse people into thinking npmjs is either endorsed by npm inc or that is the official npm api client"
And actually, I find hard to believe that this guy actually didn't thought about the possibility of his module to be confused as the official npm api module by naming it "npmjs".
However, I agree the CEO should have handle it better; if the guy is oblivious to the confusion, he could explain it better, and if he still refuses to change the name, then the CEO should have gave him some time before auto renaming it - instead of just deleting it and giving a bad impression, kind of "my house, my rules".
The whole part of the "time he could have spend with his family", now that is just pure overreaction.
Using a sed line to replace the `require('npmjs')` to... whatever is called now, on all his files, and then execute the unit tests to see everything is working fine is really not a lot of time.
amatiasq: Agree with the response.
I DON'T hate coffescript, I just dislike how its fans tend to assume the things coffescript does, everybody will love them: I really don't like the whitespace thing and I do like semicolons.
I think if someone likes python-like syntax, is ok, as long they don't assume everybody likes it, or that everybody hates the c-like syntax.
Also, the response is very right; those examples seem to show that some people dislike traditional javascript, just because they don't really understand it. (NOT everybody, of course, I'm pretty sure there are lots of competent javascript coders on the coffescript side)
In a nutshell: I don't hate coffescript, and I know what it is; it's just syntax sugared javascript, designed to make it more python-like. And that's cool if that's your thing! I just prefer traditional javascript with it's c-like syntax. But that's me; to each his own.
you are right, and they actually changed the title of the article to "5 surprisingly painful things about client-side JS"
The title on echojs should be changed too.
You are not the only one Jeff, I also agree that "npmjs" certainly can make an non-official module look official. That's what the CEO meant by confusing; is confusing in the sense of "it can confuse people into thinking npmjs is either endorsed by npm inc or that is the official npm api client" And actually, I find hard to believe that this guy actually didn't thought about the possibility of his module to be confused as the official npm api module by naming it "npmjs". However, I agree the CEO should have handle it better; if the guy is oblivious to the confusion, he could explain it better, and if he still refuses to change the name, then the CEO should have gave him some time before auto renaming it - instead of just deleting it and giving a bad impression, kind of "my house, my rules". The whole part of the "time he could have spend with his family", now that is just pure overreaction. Using a sed line to replace the `require('npmjs')` to... whatever is called now, on all his files, and then execute the unit tests to see everything is working fine is really not a lot of time.