Good point! I used similar categorising as Anders Hejlberg used in the JavaScript Jabber podcast (https://devchat.tv/js-jabber/209-jsj-typescript-with-anders-...). For those who don't like audio, he basically referred TypeScript being superset of JavaScript, unlike some other languages.
Often it feels like the CS professors I met at university, who wanted to teach you about "real programming languages and not such toys like JavaScript"
JS is very cool because of how readily available it is and the awesome ecosystem that has grown around it. That said - you don't have to be a CS professor to see that the language (especially in early incarnations) wasn't well designed, to put it nicely. A.H. knows this just like anyone with the skills to design languages and compilers.
Haha, I met him on a JS conf once. There was one of those old "JavaScript has no types and is no real language" guys and he kicked his ass.
Basically he said static typing could be good and there were languages like Scala out there with real good type systems, but most of the "pro static types"-fanboys are using crap like Java or C++.
Often it feels like the CS professors I met at university, who wanted to teach you about "real programming languages and not such toys like JavaScript"