Maybe I'm just a douchebag, but isn't all that stuff in the "Javascript: The Definitive Guide" book? Read it once (at least the part that's focused on the language itself, not DOM) and you know it.
"One thing that amazed me is how much easier my life got once I read up thoroughly on the math and string functions of JavaScript. You can use these to avoid a lot of looping and conditions."
As a colleague and friend of mine, I can tell you he's trying to be an educator and help other people become better coders. If that means he's aimed some stuff under a line for "good" that's because he's trying to help people get over that line.
But, smashingMagazine puts out some awesome content (albeit mostly link rolls, but well illustrated), I have a hard time criticizing them.
Completeness is not the same as 'bestness'.
Doug's book tells you what you should know, Flannigan's book tells you what you can use.
"The good parts" is opinion and commentary. It's not fact.
I want hard facts about what the language permits. I can make my own mind up about what is good and what is bad thanks.
"The good parts" is an interesting read once you know the language, but I certainly wouldn't recommend it as a first book on js.
You might be the best programmer on HN for all I know, but personally I'm willing to admit Doug's decades of programming and international reputation might mean he can teach me something, without me having to learn it the painful way.
I don't. I hate naming things as patterns with a passion FWIW. I'm not really sure you can really learn good taste from a book :/ All you need is the language reference, and years of practice...