I agree with the author on the server part of. It makes sense to make use of something specifically designed for the task at hand.
At the same time the post brings back memories from university when my fellows had these immature arguments about how PHP is the worst language on the planet and it shouldn't be used for anything but as a bad example. It's such a waste of time.
Some arguments of the author make sense in certain contexts, especially if you're used to do things in a certain way and you get other results in JS which is a different language, in a different context (the context being that JS to the web is much closer to what Lua is to game development than let's say Java to backend development). At the end of the day it's just lack of understanding that raises confusion. Only because something is "weird" it doesn't mean it's also bad.
I think it should be "Don't write Javascript for large and complex projects", which I can get behind.
But I think we just lack any alternative. I like lightweight sites that use the least amount of JS as possible, but some use cases plainly need it.
If you don't use a complex toolchain with bundling and minimizing, I think Typescript isn't worth the effort. If you do, you are probably writing complex projects that are advised against in the first place.
At the same time the post brings back memories from university when my fellows had these immature arguments about how PHP is the worst language on the planet and it shouldn't be used for anything but as a bad example. It's such a waste of time.
Some arguments of the author make sense in certain contexts, especially if you're used to do things in a certain way and you get other results in JS which is a different language, in a different context (the context being that JS to the web is much closer to what Lua is to game development than let's say Java to backend development). At the end of the day it's just lack of understanding that raises confusion. Only because something is "weird" it doesn't mean it's also bad.