crockford

Douglas Crockford said that once you understand monads, you suffer the curse of not being able to explain it anymore.

Will you now publicly lambast Douglas Crockford for daring to indirectly criticise these so-called frameworks?

If Crockford becomes a fundie, then is any gay-related org in violation of the license?

Here Crockford seems to be a bit part of the problem: he seems to recommend a whole new approach every couple of years.

Douglas Crockford says that classes were the single worst mistake in es6.

That Crockford doesn't get this is either him trolling or being clueless.

Don't take it so seriously, I think Crockford is awesome, and has every right to include an alert into his script.

This may be out of place, and I have no doubt that Douglas Crockford is a genius and an all-around excellent human being.

I think Crockford is wrong in that linked article.

I really disliked working with JavaScript until Douglas Crockford told me it was Scheme with C syntax, and then, suddenly, everything made sense and I actually began to enjoy it.

However, these humble beginnings act as the gateway to more systematic learning (.e.g read "Java - The Good Parts by D Crockford", etc).

I am very grateful to Crockford for the "Good Parts" book and JS5 - I like that lean approach.

Maybe we need to start proselytizing and make all the incoming Javascripters repeat: "There is no god but Crockford, and JSLint is his prophet."

As for pretension, I agree, although it doesn't originate from the likes of Crockford, but instead those uncompromising fucks who find their "artistic vision" for a website to be of greater importance than their employers' content.

Crockford’s Paradox: Once you understand and fully appreciate Monads, you lose the ability to explain them to other people.

You don't have to follow the latest fashions, but Crockford's site makes it literally hard to read his (excellent) articles.

I hit the Readability bookmarklet right after clicking on the link on HN and seeing Crockford's site.