[frik]

I am unsure about some ES6 additions.

Thanks to Crockford we got a decent ES5. Remember that several syntax changes got postpones to ES6. And don't forget about "E4X", a beast that was supposed to be JavaScript 2? http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecm... It got similar traction as XHTML 2. Both had no backwards compatibility - an insane idea. Some new features in ES6 look like Crockford "good parts" movement lost and Sun/Oracle Java evangelists won.

Hopefully Douglas Crockford updates his "JavaScript: The Good Parts" in time for JavaScript 6.

[riffraff]

I really wish E4X had gotten traction. I wrote a firefox extension using it and it was awesome to do XUL + JS with it.

Years later

  var foo = <foo>{item}</foo>; 

is the new hotness in facebook's JSX.

[lomnakkus]

AFAIUI from the React people E4X had a lot of incidental complexity and extraneous stuff relative to JSX. So there's that.

I'd argue that with ES6, JSX could just reserve the "jsx" prefix for interpolated strings and go with

   jsx`<foo>blah</foo>`

but that's a typical hindsight-is-20/20-thing.

[insin]

This blog post - "JSX: E4X The Good Parts" - covers what's in and out for JSX:

http://blog.vjeux.com/2013/javascript/jsx-e4x-the-good-parts...