Live data from Hacker News

Tower.js - JavaScript Framework for Node.js modeled after Ruby on Rails

towerjs.org

91–100 of 118 posts

Re: Tower.js - JavaScript Framework for Node.js modeled after Ruby on Rails

#91
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to reply to my own comment in order to address the numerous responses all at once. First, I'll establish some modest authority on the subject by pointing out that I've worked directly with Tim Caswell, who helped create CoffeeScript, at multiple jobs now. He's explained to me how they developed it and we've discussed the merits of it. Second, I don't believe CoffeeScript is lacking merit. I make no claims o…

What I as one of your downvoters argue is that it doesn't take more than an hour to learn CoffeeScript. I don't believe anyone is arguing that it should be labeled as JS when it's CS. What made me downvote both your original and this comment is that I can't accept that you (seemingly) write a lot of code in JS, but don't want to spen just 1 hour to learn CS properly (I know it takes this short, because I just did it…

It's not just an hour to learn. There's also the time to set up tools and environment. It's added complexity up front, and that alone is enough to turn people off because there is nothing so wrong with javascript to warrant the effort.

If you know javascript well and are familiar with it's many gotchas and you know how to use your text editor well with javascript, the coffeescript really doesn't add more than it detracts.

Re: Tower.js - JavaScript Framework for Node.js modeled after Ruby on Rails

#92
post #24
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To the down voters: My comment is civil and explannatory. You may not like my sentiments, but down votes are not intended for unpopularity. Not only that, but in this case, my comment serves to reinforce the standards of HN regarding mis-titling of links and it is being downvoted. A house divided against itself cannot stand.

I have to apologize. I fat-fingered the down vote when I originally meant to up vote your original comment. I think that my mistaken down vote was the one that initially sent your comment into the gray. This was unfortunate as yours was a remarkably civil post on a subject that can be somewhat controversial at times. I am currently working on two projects written predominantly in CoffeeScript, and I completely agree…

+1 for the idea of calling it tower.coffee instead of tower.js

Re: Tower.js - JavaScript Framework for Node.js modeled after Ruby on Rails

#93
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it is fair to call any library written in C an ASM library? C compiles to ASM (in most implementations) after all...

Oh, come on. How can you be at all familiar with JS and not be able to figure out what a CoffeeScript snippet is doing? It's not quite the difference between C and assembly.

That's not the point of his comment. It's labeled javascript when it is actually coffeescript. Call it tower.coffee, not tower.js.

If I can't fork and contribute to the project in javascript, but instead have to set up my environment for coffee script to contribute, then it's not javascript.

This isn't just about readability and comprehension, it's about contribution as well.

If the compiled javascript is bundled in there and I can read it, fair enough. If you can't accept patches and code contributions in javascript, then that's not javascript.

Re: Tower.js - JavaScript Framework for Node.js modeled after Ruby on Rails

#95
post #8

Thanks for the efforts and the framework. Unfortunately, I cannot properly appreciate it for the following reason: Please don't call something JavaScript if it's actually all in CoffeeScript (even if it's just the documentation). A lot of us have not bothered to learn CoffeeScript and a good many of them have no intention of doing so. My time was wasted following a link that says "JavaScript", a language I know well,…

Likewise, I care not for, nor to learn, PHP, Ruby, Java, Python etc., but I can understand whatever I need to.

If you're a half-way decent js dev, it's hard to believe CoffeeScript could be a cognitive stumbling block for you. Inferring custom baked inheritance in js libraries surely is more difficult.

Of course CS isn't for everyone, but a hard stance that a CS lib can't be considered 'JavaScript' seems more of a political stonewalling than an intelligent conversation. But, I've come to expect such thorny defenses cultivated by a coterie of stern acolytes who have devoted themselves to a particular flavor of programming.

Re: Tower.js - JavaScript Framework for Node.js modeled after Ruby on Rails

#96
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to reply to my own comment in order to address the numerous responses all at once. First, I'll establish some modest authority on the subject by pointing out that I've worked directly with Tim Caswell, who helped create CoffeeScript, at multiple jobs now. He's explained to me how they developed it and we've discussed the merits of it. Second, I don't believe CoffeeScript is lacking merit. I make no claims o…

What I as one of your downvoters argue is that it doesn't take more than an hour to learn CoffeeScript. I don't believe anyone is arguing that it should be labeled as JS when it's CS. What made me downvote both your original and this comment is that I can't accept that you (seemingly) write a lot of code in JS, but don't want to spen just 1 hour to learn CS properly (I know it takes this short, because I just did it…

In my three years of being on this website, I haven't had to downvote anything except spam or deliberate trolling. And that too, rarely.

Maybe it is a good idea to have the value of downvotes diminish the more you use them.

Re: Tower.js - JavaScript Framework for Node.js modeled after Ruby on Rails

#97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I as one of your downvoters argue is that it doesn't take more than an hour to learn CoffeeScript. I don't believe anyone is arguing that it should be labeled as JS when it's CS. What made me downvote both your original and this comment is that I can't accept that you (seemingly) write a lot of code in JS, but don't want to spen just 1 hour to learn CS properly (I know it takes this short, because I just did it…

You end by saying that downvoting !== hating him or disagreeing with everything he thinks, yet I can't find a worse reason to downvote than the explanation you gave right before: you literally downvoted him because of a personal decision he makes in his life that affects no one else regarding the learning of a programming language, and not at all for any factual inaccuracy in his comment. He never said anyone else sh…

Of course I downvoted him because I disagreed with what he was implying! Downvotes are not just for burying trolls, but meant to be a mean of expressing how much you agree with a comment (the opposite of an upvote).

in the last part, my emphasis was on the word everything. If you divide that comment into two different comments (first being 'misleading article' and second, (implicitly) 'I don't want to learn CS, though I write code in JS regularly'), I'd up vote the first and down vote the second comment.

It is true that his decision does not affect anyone else, but I don't believe that even such decisions can't be criticized. And I'm arguing that his decision of not wanting to learn a dialect of a language he uses on a daily basis (that would take a very short time) is not a good one, and is un-hackerish. If he had taken time to learn and have decided that CS is not for him, I neither would've down-voted him, nor would I comment on his decision.

I'm sorry if I wasted your's or any one else's time by my comments on this unimportant matter. I know that HN's comment section is meant to be a place for constructive arguments, but I couldn't help it. I read that an unseen friend is doing something that I think is really wrong, and I can't help mentioning it.

Re: Tower.js - JavaScript Framework for Node.js modeled after Ruby on Rails

#98
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I as one of your downvoters argue is that it doesn't take more than an hour to learn CoffeeScript. I don't believe anyone is arguing that it should be labeled as JS when it's CS. What made me downvote both your original and this comment is that I can't accept that you (seemingly) write a lot of code in JS, but don't want to spen just 1 hour to learn CS properly (I know it takes this short, because I just did it…

In my three years of being on this website, I haven't had to downvote anything except spam or deliberate trolling. And that too, rarely. Maybe it is a good idea to have the value of downvotes diminish the more you use them.

I think of downvotes as opposite of upvotes. If you agree with the gist of a comment and find it informative or useful, you upvote it. If you really disagree, you downvote it (and if possible, drop a line to say why you disagree). If I'm wrong and that's not the way things are being done here, I apologize from OP.

I think another way could be to decrease a users karma by 1 for every 5 downvotes he makes... and also limit the number of downvotes a user can make in a day.

Re: Tower.js - JavaScript Framework for Node.js modeled after Ruby on Rails

#99
So I see the rage is all about dissing Rails as often as possible these days, more often than not in the Node community. Yet Tower is a virtual copy and paste of the popular Ruby web framework and it's pure awesome.

There is something of a schizophrenic behavior at work here. I am a Rails dev, I love the framework for all its strengths and would choose to live with its (relative) shortcomings any day but I think there's something not healthy about how it seems that a new (web framwork|language|paradigm|whatevs) always has to (kill|take a dump on) the competition to claim the spotlights.

The two technologies can co-exist without a problem, there are many pieces of software to fill that gap without having to reinvent the wheel where Rails does the job just fine.

And to anyone saying Rails has become "bloated", quit the catchphrases-based rhetoric already, a Rails project is nothing more than a set of conventions and classes, the developer (that's you) has a choice of tools every step of the way, so if your app is bloated, stop producing bloated code or hopelessly waiting for a silver bullet, IT IS NOT HAPPENING. NEVER. NODE WON'T BE IT EITHER.

Three years from now, some clever dude will come up with a new fresh concept, Node will suddenly be so 2012 but deep down you'll know.

You'll know it's the same old caper below the latest layer of paint and glitter.

Props to the people who worked hard on Java frameworks who make tons of people happy in the heavy infrastructure enterprise realm, props to the people behind PHP and associated frameworks, props to Rails dev for pushing the envelope and making me enjoy programming again and props to Ryan Dahl, Google and Joyent for making Node happen and shaking the bottle once again.

It does NOT have to be X VS Y VS Z.

Re: Tower.js - JavaScript Framework for Node.js modeled after Ruby on Rails

#100
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to reply to my own comment in order to address the numerous responses all at once. First, I'll establish some modest authority on the subject by pointing out that I've worked directly with Tim Caswell, who helped create CoffeeScript, at multiple jobs now. He's explained to me how they developed it and we've discussed the merits of it. Second, I don't believe CoffeeScript is lacking merit. I make no claims o…

Are you arguing the HN title or the site description?

The HN title. It feels like a bait-and-switch when I click a "JavaScript" project link and see CoffeeScript documentation.
Post reply on HN