Getify

Promises are actually about trust, not syntax. With a callback you have to trust that the function that will invoke your callback (which might not be something you wrote) will only ever call it once, that it will pass through errors, that it won't call both your success and failure callbacks, etc. With a promise (or rather, following the promise specification) you instead get back an object that you choose how to handle. That object is either pending or else an immutable success or failure result. Either success or failure will be called (not both), and whichever result is called can only be called once. As such, promises allow you to avoid inversion of control and to safely interact with potentially untrusted code. This great series of articles helped me understand this: http://blog.getify.com/promises-part-2/

This has been shown to not necessarily always be the best option for performance. See http://blog.getify.com/2009/11/labjs-why-not-just-concat/, and http://yepnopejs.com/ The best and brightest in the JS performance area now mostly advocate using some form of loader to load the JavaScripts, bearing in mind that the overall page speed and perceived performance can be affected by more factors than simply the number of script files that need to be requested. Hence the recent proliferation of things like yepnope.js, require.js, lab.js etc. The fastest and best approach for your particular site will be specific to your site and there is no generic solution guaranteed to be optimal.

Here's a nice writeup that's critical of async and await: https://blog.getify.com/not-awaiting-1/

Actually it makes a ton of sense to asynchronously require javascript files on your production page. If you load them asynchronously and in parallel, you can often get much better performance than one single request (serially). http://blog.getify.com/2009/11/labjs-why-not-just-concat/

If you want more information, here's some blog posts I did to explain LABjs: http://blog.getify.com/2009/11/labjs-new-hotness-for-script-loading/ There's also posts on the site about LABjs in relation to: * speeding up DOM-ready * coupling inline script execution * concat'ing versus parallel downloads

I won't do tech interviews either, but not because I think I will fail at them. I think they are completely bogus and give totally the wrong signal. It's a waste of my time AND the company's time. I wrote up my thoughts on this exact thing a few months back: http://blog.getify.com/technical-interviews-suck/ TL;DR: Everything you need to know about if I'm a good fit is available online in my OSS (et al) track-records. If that's not good enough for you, that's not the kind of job I want anyway. I want to work for companies that value the full lifecycle of OSS work, which you can only see in such a way, and CANNOT judge via tech interviews. By the time I walk in the door for an in-person interview, I expect you to already know that I am fully qualified (tech and otherwise), and you're looking now to judge my cultural fit by sitting me down in a real team meeting and seeing how it works, etc. If I show up and you try to quiz my tech skills, you didn't do your homework on me, and I have no more time for you, so I'll just chuckle and walk out. Politely of course.