I know that not a lot of people would agree with me on that one, but i'd argue that JavaScript is a better designed language than Python or Ruby on a lots of points.
It's simpler than both regarding the core language features, and is also the only one of the three to have real anonymous functions.
Arguably i took a bold step regarding Ruby, which has them, but is confusing in this regard since blocks are not anonymous functions, and are the idiomatic and preferred construct in ruby. The problem is deeper than that , but Paul Canter does a much better job than me explaining why
I actually like the approach in Ruby, because the syntax for passing a single anonymous block (which corresponds to 90% of all cases) is really light and people have used it practically for adding syntax to Ruby.
What differentiates Ruby from Javascript (or Python for that matter) is that when defining a function using regular syntax, its name is not a variable referring that function in the scope it was declared ... what Python and Javascript are doing. And that's a trade-off that some people like it, because in Ruby you can call a function without parens and it doesn't really get in your way when wanting to do crazy shit with already declared functions.
On Python, it may not have anonymous functions, but it has true first-class functions and true closures. It's only a problem for async code because you want to have the declaration of a closure after you see the call-site that's using that closure, not before it. But in practice that's not so awful ... and if you really really want multi-line anonymous blocks there are hacks you can do with the "with" block.
In this regard Javascript is cleaner, but it is messier in other places. I don't like that its a loosly-typed language for instance (haven't we had enough of that?).
I don't like that it doesn't provide class-based OOP ... and while you can build it on top of prototypes, it's a PITA not having a standard. And class-based OOP is mapped better to the way we think, having a bad reputation only because a couple of popular languages have plagued us with bad implementations ... but people should really take a look at Smalltalk before throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
> it doesn't really get in your way when wanting to do crazy shit with already declared functions
That's something i don't like about ruby. You can do crazy shit but it leads to code wich is opaque for somebody that doesn't truly know ruby inside out. The language is full of tricks. But i don't want a full of tricks language. I want a simple language that doesn't get in my way, and doesn't provide 7 ways and 3 different mechanisms to do closure like constructs (numbers are not made up)
> On Python [...] if you really really want multiline anonymous blocks, there are hacks you can do with [...]
Well yeah i really really want them, and no i don't want to resort on hacks to use them.
I really have trouble understanding the rationale behind all those half baked constructs. The way Lua/Javascript/Scheme does it is the way to go IMHO : provide one mechanism that is simple and works well. You may loose some convenience or conciseness in the process (compared to ruby blocks for example), but what you gain is one consistent way to do things.
About javascript OO, i admit that it doesn't bother me as much as it seems to bother you, and that it may be linked to the uses i have had for javascript yet, but i have to say i indeed had more pleasure working with python/ruby object models than with javascript at the moment. I can't say if that is due to a superior mechanism or to familiarity with class based models though.
It's simpler than both regarding the core language features, and is also the only one of the three to have real anonymous functions.
I'm not fond of C syntax, but i can live with it