>>7
JavaScript belongs to this generation of dynamic multi-purpose languages that support most classic functional features, but are also comfortable to use and have syntax (be that good or bad). JavaScript, Python, Ruby and Lua, for example, are all "a lot like Scheme".
>>10
That's the problem; JavaScript has more than a moderate dose of fail. Its lists fail in that they can be iterated over their positions, instead of their values, its objects win in that a.x is syntactic sugar for a['x'] but fail because of the same thing, there are magic unenumerable methods which you can't create, there's that isNaN bullshit, and strings and numbers are automagically converted, a bad idea, which is even worse if you don't have a separate concatenation and addition operators (as you do in PHP, for example). Its syntax for lambdas is the best of all these languages though, and it's made of win.
>>13
OP