Lets say you have a bunch of textures and want to create a pattern for each of them. Most people would do it like this:

  for(var i=0; i < texcture.length; i++) {
    texcture[i].onload = function(i) {
      pattern[i] = ctx.createPattern(texcture[i], 'repeat');
    }
  }

Witch will summon the evil closure:

  for(var i=0; i < texcture.length; i++) {
    texcture[i].onload = (function(index) {
      return function() {
        pattern[index] = ctx.createPattern(texcture[index], 'repeat');
      };
    }
  })(i);

But if you used my silver bullet: Avoid anonymous functions - the root of evil ...

  for(var i=0; i < texcture.length; i++) {
    createPattern(i);
  }

  function createPattern(i) {
    texcture[i].onload = function() {
      pattern[i] = ctx.createPattern(texcture[i], 'repeat');
    }
  }

I don't understand the problem you think anonymous functions are causing, or how your solution of just not using them helps.

Sure, if you're littering your code with anonymous functions at the top level, you have no idea what is executing when or why. But who does that?

How do you think naming a function, then calling it is any better, if you just littered your function calls all over the place (assuming that is why you think this is a problem of course).