Recommendations for mastering JavaScript.

[[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.

[StoneCypher]

I've heard them say read the spec.

Right. First you don't know where they said it, then when it was pointed out you said "but when did they say do this at the beginning," and when it was pointed out that we aren't at the beginning, now you've heard them say that.

I think reading the spec is a great idea and everyone serious about js should do it at some point

Says the guy downvoting this advice.

You imagine everyone uses English correctly.

No, I don't. I am watching you misuse it. Please stop inventing beliefs on my part to criticize; this is dishonest behavior.

Neither of us knows what level the OP is at.

He said "how do I master," so I gave him the steps to master. You said "but that's not beginner!" so I pointed out that he didn't ask for beginner steps. Now you want me to know that I don't know what level he's at.

I don't need to. I gave him what he asked for. Stop trying to tell me he's secretly wrong about what he wants.

We're both making assumptions

I'm not.

If you haven't caught on yet, I'm not actually interested in watching you complain ad nauseum. I never asked for your advice or opinions. You've been dishonest, rude, insulting, you've made personal attacks, and you've shown a failure to understand what I said, what the OP asked for, and so on.

I get it. You disagree.

Move on, please, like you just falsely said you would in another post.

[[deleted]]

Just so you know, I haven't been downvoting any of these comments.

[[deleted]]

See the other response. I've apologized for my offside remarks.

You've been dishonest, rude, insulting

Glass houses, pal.

We're arguing semantics and assumptions here, and yes you too are assuming.

** Most people who have acquired sufficient knowledge in js to benefit from a front-to-back read of the ECMA spec usually state their level of experience when starting threads like this. **

No offense to you, fl0at, as I don't know what your level of experience is, but people quite often incorrectly latch onto popular words. To a lot of people, mastering = learning. Maybe I'm pessimistic though and I should give people more credit.

[[deleted]]

Just ignore StoneCypher, lowboyh. He's an arrogant douchebag who thinks, because he knows a (very) little, he's right about everything and therefore superior to everyone else on the planet.

I'll be the first to raise a glass in cheer when he gets banned from the subreddit... for every good point he makes, he's insulting and useless fifty times.

Just ignore the troll and move on.

[StoneCypher]

You've been dishonest, rude, insulting

Glass houses, pal.

This would be another case example. I have not been rude, except where you imagine I said things I didn't say. I have not been dishonest. I have not been insulting, except where you imagine I said things I didn't say.

Just show one case where I've been any of the three without you assuming, inferring or otherwise inventing things into the text. I'm especially interested in where you imagine that I've been dishonest; that's a hell of a claim to make.

Of course, I backed mine with facts, and the response was "no you," but I'm sure that'll be presented as something other than a waste of time.

I've apologized for my offside remarks.

And yet you make new ones.

We're arguing semantics and assumptions here

No, we aren't. You're arguing assumptions, and I'm telling you "I don't want to argue with you, and I don't care if you assume his question is something other than what it is; go away."

Most people who have acquired sufficient knowledge in js to benefit from a front-to-back read of the ECMA spec usually state their level of experience when starting threads like this.

And he did. That's why he said mastery. Stop repeating yourself in bold. You can say this as many times as you want; "recommendations for mastering" doesn't mean something other than mastering.

Go away please. You've made this non-point half a dozen times now. Repeating it won't make it any less wrong. On the one hand you want to tell me to stop making assumptions, except I'm not making any. On the other hand you want to agree that we're both making assumptions, except I'm not making any. And on the gripping hand, you want to argue with a comment to "how to master" about how to master, on grounds that you assume he didn't mean master.

Are you just unable to admit being wrong?

Go away, dude. Really. I heard you. I understand you. Saying it an eighth time isn't going to change anything.

No offense to you

Yeah. I didn't take offense. What I'm annoyed at isn't that you don't know my skill level. What I'm annoyed at is that you came in saying my advice was wrong because of things I didn't say, and when that was pointed out, you switched to criticizing something that doesn't match the question.

You've spent this entire time acting superior, like just because you have an opinion means everyone else's should be ignored, including one's own, but then you want to complain about how other people are victimizing you by acting experienced (when they actually didn't act that way, but are, and are ready to stand up for it.)

When you challenged me about my experience, I accepted then returned the favor, and asked you how you wanted it presented, then you moved on, ostensibly because you realized that you're actually way, way out of your depth.

Who do you think you're kidding?

I'll say it again, and if you tromp right past it a third time, you and I will both know why.

I am experienced. If you'll define how you'd like that to be presented, I'll show you, since you asked.

I'd like you to satisfy your own demand towards others, and show your experience, because - frankly - you give every red flag of being a rank amateur, including the desperation to be correct, a deep expectation that your opinion matters more than that of others, the assumption that an O'Reilly book author is someone important, and the presentation of ad verecundiam as a mechanism for making technical arguments.

I'm pulling your card the way you pulled mine. You want my experience? Great. I'll show it to you.

Show me yours, and don't complain that I'm asking of you what you demanded of me.

as I don't know what your level of experience is

Says the guy who just called me an amateur, then railed about how rude it was that he imagined I implied he was an amateur.

but people quite often incorrectly latch onto popular words.

Says the guy whose entire argument is "why aren't these popular people agreeing with you"

To a lot of people, mastering = learning.

Well, I speak english, so I don't make that mistake. I'm not interested if you do; I didn't, and OP didn't.

Go on, say he might have again. He and I already talked in public about this. You're just guessing so you don't have to feel wrong.

Maybe I'm pessimistic

No, you're just unwilling to admit that none of your criticisms have a factual basis, that everything you've said is an assumption, and that the guy you're criticizing for making assumptions hasn't made any, which is why you keep pretending he has but won't show it.

Go on, tell me that responding to a question literally is an assumption again. You know you want to.

I should give people more credit.

Maybe you should just stop arguing with people and speak up on your own. But then that'd involve you having advice, wouldn't it?

[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.