31–40 of 46 posts
* https://github.com/jashkenas/coffee-script/wiki/List-of-lang...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fear not. The re-implementation will be completely backwards compatible. It just a smoother compilation pipeline, and adds some output configurability. But regardless, Jeremy and I have decided it would be best to change the name.
I will suggest a few alternatives: Winescript, Caffèscript, Browniscript, Shortscript and Rubyscript.
This and nine more CoffeeScript derivates* from people who rather like to fragment a landscape with marginal improvements instead of supporting the leading pack are the reasons that CoffeScript hasn't reach critical mass and will fail as a standard. * https://github.com/jashkenas/coffee-script/wiki/List-of-lang...
Even if CoffeeScript was as niche as you argue, I'm not convinced that that would have any bearing on its success. CoffeeScript doesn't need a wide community to achieve success because it compiles to and is completely interoperable with JavaScript, the most popular programming language.
This and nine more CoffeeScript derivates* from people who rather like to fragment a landscape with marginal improvements instead of supporting the leading pack are the reasons that CoffeScript hasn't reach critical mass and will fail as a standard. * https://github.com/jashkenas/coffee-script/wiki/List-of-lang...
CoffeeScript hasn't attained critical mass? It's the 10th most popular language on github[1], over a decade younger than all the other contenders, and growing quickly. Even if CoffeeScript was as niche as you argue, I'm not convinced that that would have any bearing on its success. CoffeeScript doesn't need a wide community to achieve success because it compiles to and is completely interoperable with JavaScript, the…
Forgive me for being skeptical, but it seems to me that CoffeeScript is going the way of Lisp: a language by hackers for hackers, with way too many incompatible implementations because each implementer has their own pet features that must be included.
There's already a production ready transpiler, and a big bunch of production code to test against every new transpiler. Why do you think this is going to be a reason for fragmentation? And, by the way, coffeescript is not intended to be a language for hackers (I mean, only for hackers) but for Ruby programmers moving to javascript, JS programmers looking for a more terse syntax and programmers with an eye for tersene…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I will suggest a few alternatives: Winescript, Caffèscript, Browniscript, Shortscript and Rubyscript.
The names I suggested were "CoffeeScript: Reloaded", "CoffeeScript Episode II: Attack of the Clones", "The CoffeeScript Supremacy", and "Live Free or CoffeeScript Hard". Technically, right now it's "CoffeeScript II: The Wrath of Khan". Jeremy suggested CoffeeScript Redux. That's probably the best choice, though a little boring.
That would be the fourth version of CoffeeScript. The 2nd version would be "CoffeeScript 2: Script Harder" which is much more awesome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He wants to remove semicolons except where absolutely necessary? Is he nuts? The compiled output shouldn't be relying on an error-correction feature. Especially since it might break minifiers and validators.
I recognize the minifier significance. But wait, there are validators (!?) that choke on valid (!) syntax?
Here is a relevant groupon blog post: https://engineering.groupon.com/2012/javascript/looking-forw... How about multiple backend support? Perhaps then someone could add a dart or NaCl backend.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I will suggest a few alternatives: Winescript, Caffèscript, Browniscript, Shortscript and Rubyscript.
The names I suggested were "CoffeeScript: Reloaded", "CoffeeScript Episode II: Attack of the Clones", "The CoffeeScript Supremacy", and "Live Free or CoffeeScript Hard". Technically, right now it's "CoffeeScript II: The Wrath of Khan". Jeremy suggested CoffeeScript Redux. That's probably the best choice, though a little boring.