Does the fact that anonymous self-referencing function closures are so prevelant in JavaScript suggest that JavaScript is an incomplete specification? We see so much of this:

(function () { /* do cool stuff */ })();

and I suppose everything is a matter of taste, but does this not look like a kludge, when all you want is a private namespace? Couldn't JavaScript implement packages and proper classes?

Compare to ActionScript 3, also based on EMACScript, where you get

package com.tomauger {
  import bar;
  class Foo {
     public function Foo(){
       // etc...
     }

     public function show(){
       // show stuff
     }

     public function hide(){
       // hide stuff
     }
     // etc...
  }
}

Contrast to the convolutions we perform in JavaScript (this, from the jQuery plugin authoring documentation):

(function( $ ){

  var methods = {
    init : function( options ) { // THIS },
    show : function( ) { // IS   },
    hide : function( ) { // GOOD },
    update : function( content ) { // !!! }
  };

  $.fn.tooltip = function( method ) {

    // Method calling logic
    if ( methods[method] ) {
      return methods[ method ].apply( this, Array.prototype.slice.call( arguments, 1 ));
    } else if ( typeof method === 'object' || ! method ) {
      return methods.init.apply( this, arguments );
    } else {
      $.error( 'Method ' +  method + ' does not exist on jQuery.tooltip' );
    }    

  };

})( jQuery );

I appreciate that this question could easily degenerate into a rant about preferences and programming styles, but I'm actually very curious to hear how you seasoned programmers feel about this and whether it feels natural, like learning different idiosyncrasies of a new language, or kludgy, like a workaround to some basic programming language components that are just not implemented?