Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

towerjs.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 118 posts

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

#101

Post by zalew »

jeswin wrote: post #96
pooriaazimi wrote: post #67

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.

Second that. Before maybe about half a year ago, I rarely observed downvotes on comments that are not rude, worthless, ot totally offtopic. Now the fluctuation of up/downvotes on comments (including mine) got out of hand and people use it to 'disagree'. It's stupid. I wouldn't mind if pg removed downvoting at all.

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

#103

Post by Detrus »

eldude wrote: post #73
pooriaazimi wrote: post #67

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…

This pervasive assumption of CoffeeScript's superiority as a foregone conclusion is ridiculous. There are so many excellent JavaScript programmers that choose not to program in CoffeeScript for so many reasons, that it's surprising to see the extent of this assumption. Defend the merits of CoffeeScript all you want, I'm not even bothering to argue with you about them, and _I even conceded already that it does in fact…

People who write libraries and frameworks want to advertise them, get good SEO from the larger JS community. So they'll call their projects Blah.js.

It's also easier to remember JS libraries as Blah.js instead of having to worry that it's Blah.js or Blah.coffee.

Yes it is somewhat dishonest. But users of a lib or framework should not be reading its code in most circumstances. Otherwise it's crap API/documentation.

With CoffeeScript you can use the lib from JavaScript seamlessly. It is essentially Blah.js. If the lib was written in Ojb-J or ClojureScript that's another story. Then lib authors couldn't say it's Blah.js.

If you need to read coffee code as JS for some reason, compile it. If you need to submit a patch, doing it in CoffeeScript will indeed be a minor inconvenience. Not so for Clojure, Obj-J or whatever else will come along.

---- And on another note. These languages compiling to JS are essentially causing fragmentation. If ClojureScript gets as popular as CoffeeScript is now it won't be pretty. I'll bet that CoffeeScript will reach critical mass at some point. The newest libs and tutorials will all be Coffee. JS.next should adopt as many features as possible or promote it as the new standard to stem the tide and make fragmentation less obvious. CoffeeScript would be more stable as a language, hard to make JS semantics prettier.

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

#104

Post by eric-hu »

eldude wrote: 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,…

No offense to your original statement, what you said makes sense--the link was mislabeled in a common way.

I just want to point to this comment and its children as the reason that HN should have comment thread collapsing.

There's no reason the majority of people checking the comments for this link should have to see the language debate. It's not relevant to the Tower framework. The only reason this debate is so high up is because people chose to upvote the original comment.

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

#107

Post by ksec »

nawariata wrote: post #105

I "like" how there are currently 96 comments in this thread and not even one touches the subject, discussing merits of tower.js.

I thought of the same as well, would really like some constructive discussion on the differences.

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

#108

Post by elliottkember »

I got really excited about this, thinking it was a Rails-style front-end framework. It's still really cool as a server-side framework, but I'm totally hankering for a full Rails stack in the browser.

I've used Backbone and played with Spine - I just can't help but feel as though they could go all the way. I wonder whether that's viable?

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

#109

Post by VMG »

Cushman wrote: post #30
eldude wrote: 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,…

...you know JavaScript well and haven't bothered to "learn" the second-most-popular dialect? Take ten minutes right now and read through the CoffeeScript reference-- poof, you learned it. It is just JavaScript. Really, no one's forcing you to write it. But if you have a working understanding of JavaScript and you can't read CoffeeScript fluently, it's because you aren't trying. Just swallow your pride and deal with i…

With significant white space, brace insertion and other things happening, it's not the easiest language to read. I say this as someone who has written his share of applications in CoffeeScript.
Post reply on HN