I agree that saying this issue is &quot;emblematic of a serious gap in your understanding of programming&quot; is.. well.. douchebaggery.<p>However I feel a lot of the article and many of your posts about it in here come down to &quot;it makes me feel uncomfortable&quot; which.. I mean, ok. Sure. I hate spaces for indentation and think double quotes are better (and I have reasons for both)... but I don&#x27;t say there&#x27;s no use to the other options.<p>I feel you&#x27;re throwing the baby out with the bathwater here.<p><i>Should</i> const probably have been about value immutability too? Yes, I think so. I <i>totally</i> agree. That&#x27;s a REALLY important topic to discuss. Maybe pitch it to the ES2016 committee as an iterative upgrade to const?<p>But as it stands it <i>does have value</i>. Yes it <i>mostly</i> just codifies what programmers original did as a language construct but it does also stop redefinitions which was an annoyingly common issue. So it&#x27;s progress. Small, incremental, and not as full-featured as we&#x27;d both like... but it&#x27;s progress.<p>Drawing attention to the issues with const is important... but there&#x27;s no reason to rail so hard against its <i>usage</i> when it&#x27;s understood to have those limitations... is there?