[jt2190]

I’m not sure what benefit I, the learner, get when the author makes editorial comments about how “unfortunate” certain features of a language are. It seems to me that that I’m better served by just quickly acknowledging that something different happens under certain circumstances, and then I’m taught the techniques that professionals use when those circumstances arise.

(Edit: Perhaps we need a clearer model of the student that is material is meant for. Novices will need a “just do it this way” approach, while experienced programmers will need more detailed explanations.)

[xsmasher]

I think it helps to point out when something is an oddity that serves no practical modern purpose; the learner needs to know which are the "good bits" and which are the backward compatible cruft so they don't mistake one for the other.

[jt2190]

> I think it helps...

Not necessarily. Teaching too much, too fast can distract a student from mastering each step; from properly “leveling up”. Teaching materials (including online courses like this) need to start with a theory of the learner in order to select and tailor materials for best effect.

[st1x7]

It's useful to know whether some language behaviour is the result of planning or just historical accident.

[robertlagrant]

Well, I think some students will be switched on enough to spot inconsistencies, and so it makes sense to acknowledge them and not have the student feeling that their mental model is wrong, when it's not, or that they shouldn't expect any consistency, when they should