So to the article’s title: is javascript ever tBefore reading the article my answer to the question…
Mike Cerny
11

The point of the article is that there really isn’t a scenario where JavaScript is “best.” The reason is because JavaScript is fundamentally a broken language. Sure, it has a large user community. Sure, it has a large ecosystem. Sure, there are lots of employment opportunities for JavaScript developers. But none of this alters the fact that JavaScript is a broken language (arguably worse than PHP!). This has been opined endlessly on the web, but let me point you to two of the most persuasive criticisms: Peter DiSalvo’s Answer and Alexei Boronine’s screed. JavaScript is a dangerous language to use. It imposes an uncomfortable cognitive burden. If you write large applications in JavaScript, you will find that it doesn’t scale well; you will experience greater difficulties with maintenance, with debugging, with reliability guarantees (it gives me the willies that some enterprises are using JavaScript for mission-critical applications). Moreover, the large pool of JavaScript “talent” is highly questionable. Even JavaScript evangelist Eric Elliott admits that “almost everybody knows a little JavaScript, but almost nobody really understands JavaScript.” Why is this language so difficult to understand? (It’s not.)

I appreciate the fact that there are many cool front-end frameworks for JavaScript like Angular, React, Ember, Meteor, Mithril, etc. It’s most unfortunate, however, that they’re based on a broken language. The question everyone needs to ask is this: Why choose any of these frameworks only to inflict JavaScript on yourself? I do not ask this question lightly; it is most serious.

All things being equal, your argument would be irrefutable. Unfortunately, all things aren’t equal. JavaScript is a dangerous language to use. And that makes all the difference in the world.