I've only seen these kind of libraries in JavaScript. They are a direct result of poor language design.

Nothing in javascript makes you have tiny pointless libraries that check if something is odd or if something is an array(ish). This is just a quirk of javascript developer culture

At some point someone went "let's decouple as much as we can! A library should be just a single function!" and we've spent a lot of time since then showing why that's quite a bad idea

The lack of types perhaps inspires some of these functions masquerading as libraries, but they're often trivial checks that you could (and probably should) do inline in your less pointless functions, if needed.

	▲	pornel 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Properties of a language shape the tooling and culture that develops around it. JS has exploded in popularity when Internet Explorer was still around, before ES6 cleanup of the language. JS had lots of gotchas where seemingly obvious code wasn't working correctly, and devs weren't keeping up with all the dumb hacks needed for even basic things. Working around IE6's problems used to be a whole profession (quirksmode.org). Browsers didn't have support for JS modules yet, and HTTP/1.1 couldn't handle many small files, so devs needed a way to "bundle" their JS anyway. Node.js happened to have a solution, while also enabled reusing code between client and server, and the micro libraries saved developers from having to deal with JS engine differences and memorize all the quirks.