I will never understand people complaining about JS (or any other language, for that matter) on the grounds that it doesn't have some very specific thing "in the standard library".
That's what a package manager is for, friend. So that you don't need to ship everyone's kitchensink with the language runtime whether you need it or not.
Tangentially, I feel like there's a pretty strong correlation between "arguing that the standard library of a language should be extensive" and the problem of "popular things are often those that superficially sound like they have a lot of features, even if it comes at the expense of reliability, maintainability, complexity, etc.".
The latter is often recognized as a problem around here (and rightly so). It saddens me that the former then gets missed so often by the same people.
The software development world needs a serious reconsideration as to its priorities and metrics, honestly.