Clue 1: it praises PHP. Even PHP apologists usually restrict themselves to simply defending PHP rather than praising it.
Clue 2: it calls JS "dangerous" and "poor designed" (sic). This is vague but provocative enough to invite emotional responses rather than factual discussion.
Clue 3: it explicitly calls out "the scope of variables" as "broken". Again this is vague enough to be ambiguous but strongly worded enough to seem insulting. This is especially confusing if contrasted with PHP, which isn't exactly known for being intuitive and simple in that regard: http://php.net/manual/en/language.variables.variable.php
But you're right, which is why I said it seems like an obvious troll comment rather than insisting that it can only be that. It might just be a poorly worded expression of frustration stemming from an incomplete understanding. Hence my attempt at a factual response.
Clue 2: it calls JS "dangerous" and "poor designed" (sic). This is vague but provocative enough to invite emotional responses rather than factual discussion.
Clue 3: it explicitly calls out "the scope of variables" as "broken". Again this is vague enough to be ambiguous but strongly worded enough to seem insulting. This is especially confusing if contrasted with PHP, which isn't exactly known for being intuitive and simple in that regard: http://php.net/manual/en/language.variables.variable.php
But you're right, which is why I said it seems like an obvious troll comment rather than insisting that it can only be that. It might just be a poorly worded expression of frustration stemming from an incomplete understanding. Hence my attempt at a factual response.