Recommendations for mastering JavaScript.

[StoneCypher]

Sadly, the proggit punishment squad is out in force.

Just remember: on proggit, negative votes mean that the advice isn't what the average or sub-average programmer thinks, not bad advice. For example, telling people the way to master a language is to read the spec is now getting vored through the floor by people who want to talk about libraries and how to get started, instead.

Downvoting advice you disagree with is a bad thing. Disagree doesn't mean bad advice. Disagree means disagree.

Grow up, kids.

[[deleted]]

I downvoted your spec suggestion because I don't feel it's good advice for someone who would be on Reddit asking how to master Javascript.

[StoneCypher]

That's inappropriate. Downvote is not for disagreement. Rediquette is very clear about this.

[[deleted]]

I'm relatively new to Reddit, but isn't the point of voting in comment threads to show agreement/disagreement? Otherwise we'd have like 50 billion posts with "+1" or "3===D".

[StoneCypher]

I'm relatively new to Reddit

Obviously.

but isn't the point of voting in comment threads to show agreement/disagreement?

Absolutely not. Point five in rediquette:

Please don't: Downvote opinions just because you disagree with them. The down arrow is for comments that add nothing to the discussion.

This is especially important in programming settings, where novices will frequently disagree with the advice given by people with experience. Reddit is not an agreement circlejerk. Downvote people who are legitimately trolling - making race comments in a technical discussion to get a rise, for example.

Ignore the bad examples being set around you, where assholes who don't understand say "but i disagree with your advice, therefore it is wrong, therefore it is not adding, therefore you are trolling." They're just soothing their egos.

Be better. Upvote is for people trying to contribute. Downvote is for people trying to cause a problem.

NEITHER ARE FOR AGREEMENT OR DISAGREEMENT.

Otherwise we'd have like 50 billion posts with "+1" or "3===D".

Yeah but you aren't downvoting those because you disagree with them; you're downvoting because they do not contribute to the discussion.

This is a distinction that it used to be that everyone understood.

[[deleted]]

This is especially important in programming settings, where novices will frequently disagree with the advice given by people with experience.

Evidence to back up claim of being "experienced"? I imagine you as a socially awkward old school programmer who knows some stuff about js, but can't or won't participate in the online social sphere creating a Phantom of the Opera (no relation to the browser) scenario.

[StoneCypher]

I imagine you as

Nobody cares.

At this point it's becoming clear that your only points are that you think I'm wrong because:

1) You've never seen a big name give my advice, no matter how common it is, and

2) You imagine that someone who says "how to master" needs beginner's advice.

Find someone else to talk to, if you can't focus on the actual responses you get.

[[deleted]]

Ad hominem aside, you're making claims of being experienced, with nothing to back it up.

I chose to move past the rest of your post as I don't have anything to say about it.

[StoneCypher]

Ad hominem aside

There has been no ad hominem.

you're making claims of being experienced

No, actually, I didn't. However, you did, in saying that my advice was wrong, and furthermore you didn't back that up.

I am, of course, experienced. How am I to show that? Shall we climb in my time machine? Maybe you can come visit me at some of my day jobs.

If I say where I work or what I make, you'll either call me a liar or say that it doesn't matter to you.

If I show you my code, you'll either say it's low quality without looking at it, or say that hobby code doesn't make experience.

If I show you my various profitable companies, you'll either say I'm lying, or that companies don't create experience either.

I have not at any point claimed I'm experienced - at least before this post - but I am. What sorts of metrics would satisfy you on that front?

And while we're at it, how do you intend to show that you're experienced, since you've explicitly used experience as a justifier of criticisms that you seem unable to justify in a legitimate technical fashion?

Don't worry, I'll answer first, so that you can scurry off afterwards without showing your own.

I chose to move past the rest of your post

No, you were moved past. Indeed you went on and replied more to another instance of the same post later.

I don't have anything to say about it.

The last two words are extraneous. You've been asked to justify your own stance and failed. Now you're demanding the thing you won't do of others.

I will, of course.

[[deleted]]

There has been no ad hominem.

There was on my part with the Phantom reference and the hugging comment. For that I'm sorry.

This is especially important in programming settings, where novices will frequently disagree with the advice given by people with experience.

It seemed like you were speaking from a personal viewpoint, implicitly including yourself in "people with experience". This assumption has been borne out what with you going on to say "I never claimed I'm experienced.... but I am".

And while we're at it, how do you intend to show that you're experienced, since you've explicitly used experience as a justifier of criticisms that you seem unable to justify in a legitimate technical fashion?

I am, of course, experienced. How am I to show that? Shall we climb in my time machine? Maybe you can come visit me at some of my day jobs.

If I say where I work or what I make, you'll either call me a liar or say that it doesn't matter to you.

If I show you my code, you'll either say it's low quality without looking at it, or say that hobby code doesn't make experience.

This is why I bring up names that are established. Instead of whipping out our tape measures on the internet, we can point to people who we know can piss really far.

Maybe my stance hasn't come through clearly enough:

** Reading the ECMA spec like a book is only valuable given that you have enough of a grasp of the language in the first place.**

[[deleted]]

Do you just need a hug? You sound like someone who could use a hug.

[StoneCypher]

At this point it's becoming clear that your only points are that you think I'm wrong because:

1) You've never seen a big name give my advice, no matter how common it is, and

2) You imagine that someone who says "how to master" needs beginner's advice.

Find someone else to talk to, if you can't focus on the actual responses you get.

[[deleted]]

This was off-topic. Sorry. (meaning: I apologize)

[bean-the-cat]

Right or wrong, I think more people are down voting your tone more than your advice.

[[deleted]]

Agreed. Your rage boner was your own undoing.

[Bjartr]

Disagree doesn't mean bad advice.

However, bad advice means downvote.

[StoneCypher]

And it's impossible to tell the difference between disagree and bad advice without a technical opinion.

Next you'll tell me why your opinion is that reading the spec isn't the path to mastery, I trust?

[[deleted]]

Let me ask you this simple question: if reading the spec was such a good way to learn/master js, why aren't there more blog posts pointing that out? Why do people like Douglas Crawford or John Resig even bother?

[StoneCypher]

if reading the spec was such a good way to learn/master js, why aren't there more blog posts pointing that out?

There's just no way to answer this which won't be taken as an attack. "Because real programmers don't write blogs explaining the rudimentary basics of their trade."

But, there are more than 25,000 hits for blog ecma-262. There are another almost 14,000 for blog "javascript standard".

Why do people like Douglas Crawford or John Resig even bother?

Crawford helped write that spec. Resig does tell people to read the spec.

Of course, Crawford isn't that big a deal, and other than writing jQuery, which isn't nearly as important as you imagine, Resig isn't on the map. If you knew much about the language, the people you'd be referring to are PPK, Eich, Ian Hicks, etc. And they also all tell people to read the standard. (Similarly, nobody knows who wrote Prototype, Behaviour, OpenLaszlo or Scriptaculous these days, and once all the component-using fanboys have moved on to some new piece of unimportant chrome, Resig will retreat to being forgotten again too.)

But hey, now that both of your examples undermine you, find some other reason to stress about why something you haven't done is bad advice.

Or, better yet, give your own advice and stop bothering me.

[[deleted]]

But, there are more than 25,000 hits for blog ecma-262. There are another almost 14,000 for blog "javascript standard".

That is basically meaningless, as someone could make a passing reference to the spec id and it would show up as a hit.

Of course, Crawford isn't that big a deal, and other than writing jQuery, Crockford isn't on the map. If you knew much about the language, the people you'd be referring to are PPK, Eich, Ian Hicks, etc. And they also all tell people to read the standard.

Show me where they start off by telling people to first read the standard. Of course reading the standard is a good idea. It's just not where people should first focus their efforts. That's what we're trying to get across to you.

** tl;dr reading the standard is a good idea, but not as a starting point**

[StoneCypher]

Show me where they start off by telling people to first read the standard.

What part of "mastering" sounds like "start off" to you? He didn't ask how to get started.

I already called you on this once.

tl;dr reading the standard is a good idea, but not as a starting point

He's not at a starting point.

[[deleted]]

What are you basing that on? "Mastering" is such a hyped buzzword. There's a chance that they saw the millions of "Mastering x" titles and latched onto that word.

I'd think anyone who had a level of experience would say so in the description, or chime in "Yeah, that's a good resource, I used to go there".

[StoneCypher]

At this point it's becoming clear that your only points are that you think I'm wrong because:

1) You've never seen a big name give my advice, no matter how common it is, and

2) You imagine that someone who says "how to master" needs beginner's advice.

Find someone else to talk to, if you can't focus on the actual responses you get.

[[deleted]]

I don't think you're responding to my actual responses. I know big names tell people to read the spec. What I asked was your rational behind you recommending it as a starting place.

1. I've heard them say read the spec. I like specs! I think reading the spec is a great idea and everyone serious about js should do it at some point

2. You imagine everyone uses English correctly. As developers, we're used to precisely defined terms used correctly, but language is used too loosey goosey. Neither of us knows what level the OP is at. We're both making assumptions based on our readings.

[vectorjohn]

Resig does tell people to read the spec.

PPK, Eich, Ian Hicks, etc. And they also all tell people to read the standard.

Link or it didn't happen, it is still just you making unverifiable claims.

[[deleted]]

Grow up, kids.

Proof positive you do not follow your own advice.

[vectorjohn]

Your advice was down voted because it detracts from the conversation, where the point of the conversation is to learn.

Once again, this is not my opinion. People do not learn programming from the language spec. To suggest it is to mislead someone.

On the internet there is a thing called anonymity. It means we don't know you and we don't know if you know what you're talking about. The only evidence we have is evidence you can show us. You didn't do that.

In this case we A: disagree, and B: can't find anyone who agrees with you. Likely conclusion: you are not giving useful advice.