CoffeeScript is not a language worth learning

Post by wwweston » Tue, Dec 20, 2011, 9:07 AM UTC

latchkey wrote: post #113

I'm starting to feel like anyone who has a negative opinion of CoffeeScript should prefix their statements with "I've spent the last M months writing code in CoffeeScript for H hours a day and these are my specific issues with it." Otherwise, these endless discussions of JavaScript vs. CoffeeScript really aren't productive. If you haven't spent time with actual coding in it, then you probably don't have as well forme…

Post by icebraining » Tue, Dec 20, 2011, 12:31 PM UTC

Void_ wrote: post #122

icebraining wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the title says "CoffeeScript is not worth learning". No, it says "it's not a language worth learning". The author's point is that CoffeeScript is not a language, but a tool for JavaScript.

I think it's quite obvious the title is deliberately misleading to get more people to read it.

Post by erwanl » Tue, Dec 20, 2011, 12:49 PM UTC

jcromartie wrote: post #124

I don't the fact that CoffeeScript can't be debugged until browsers support it. JavaScript errors are bad enough, but until I can get a CoffeeScript source line number in an error I simply refuse.

Post by obtu » Tue, Dec 20, 2011, 2:16 PM UTC

gerggerg wrote: post #44

fab13n wrote: post #20

TL;DR: Coffeescript should be seen as a way to enforce good Javascript style, and as such it does a decent job. That's an interesting and very defensible PoV. However, even considered as such, it has some serious warts: * It has no clearly-defined semantics: it's an accretion of rewriting tricks, and as such, it's often very hard to predict how two tricks will interact together, especially when they involve indentati…

From the coffeescript website: CoffeeScript is a little language that compiles into JavaScript. Underneath all those awkward braces and semicolons, JavaScript has always had a gorgeous object model at its heart. CoffeeScript is an attempt to expose the good parts of JavaScript in a simple way. Coffeescript has never presented itself otherwise. What causes the confusion is pointless discussions about semantics and peo…

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Dec 20, 2011, 4:18 PM UTC

latchkey wrote: post #116

tjholowaychuk wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you actually type function(){} ? not utilize those editors hey :p

I type => or -> Once you get used to not reading the auto typed 'function() {}', it really makes your code look a lot cleaner.