Wadler's paper is an excellent piece of exposition that's us at the level of an upper-year undergraduate textbook. There's nothing condescending about referring a professional to a relevant paper in their discipline, but it is troubling when a professional won't even read over a paper.
It's troubling when people assume there's only one paper that a professional should read. Or that a professional cannot choose between papers to read. etc.
You are misquoting me. I said steering others away from the original source of work to an interior source (incomplete at best) is anti-intellectualism.
I do not mean to be condescending, but I feel very strongly about this.
Wait... you're tone policing haskell users after referring to even the _adaptation_ of functional techniques as a "crime against humanity?"
Please rethink this approach. It is a bad approach. It fails to capture (what I think you) your argument (is) and antagonizes people needlessly. And quite frankly, a lot of people are being VERY nice by not following in the tradition of absolutely burying javascript for its nonsensical primitive type semantics.