> Typically this isn't how you respect other people and get them to respond positively to your comments
> The examples in the original piece are in javascript. Why don't you RTFA before commenting on the "point."
I wrote that article, so in effect you are responding to my original comment : ).
Fair that what I wrote was condescending. I purposefully wrote it that way, as a second meta-point: to get you to experience what it feels like when people assume negative, and use words like "Ok, no", "Javascript programmer" (negative connotation), "junior"
With that accomplished, moving on to more civil ground.
> I'm not sure what you're objective is because people aren't really reading this thread... it's already buried.
First, as you can now feel, I was pretty annoyed by your presumptuous tone in your initial comment. Second it really did feel like you had depth and love in programming, but from your comments I intuited some traits that lead to lower potential outcomes. Mainly: jumping to conclusions too quickly (harder to learn new things this way, and unless you are almost finished with your career, it can be detrimental).
> Does the guy even know that the class keyword is just sugar for "function" in javascript? ... Not to be insulting but the parent poster likely doesn't have much experience.
Yes, I do know what classes de-sugar to in javascript, I worked with many of the folks who brought classes to the ES spec.
As you most likely know, javascript classes are a bit of a special case, because JS uses prototypical inheritance. Classes in other languages do not de-sugar this way.
For example: you can see a function as a special `class` with only one method `apply`, or you could see a class as a special higher order function.
> Who missed the point?
The point is, that though functions and classes seem distinct, they are less distinct than one would think. In your comments, you seem very attached to the specific distinctions you've set up with classes, procedures, and functions. One question I would ask you is: what is _similar_ about them? Could you express all of these with one abstraction? Is there a difference between choosing `class` as the base abstraction, vs a closure?