What does this do?
operator {min, max} := Math
value min ceiling max floor
Civet: A Superset of TypeScript
41–50 of 237 posts
Re: Civet: A Superset of TypeScript
#42Civet. Kopi luwak coffee. It's CoffeeScript. I wrote a bunch of CoffeeScript back in the day, and everyone I've spoken to about it feels the same, that it was a bad idea in hindsight, and a language dead end. The language was only syntactic sugar, and by not bringing anything else to the table, was unconvincing for ports and support in other ecosystems. It now seems that most codebases have been decaffeinated though.…
CoffeeScript was not only a great idea but also successful beyond its adoption. It influenced and inspired many features that JavaScript later incorporated, such as arrow functions and destructuring assignments. Over time, JavaScript evolved to the point where the few quality of life improvements offered by CoffeeScript no longer justified learning an entirely new syntax.
I sometimes wonder if Kotlin will end up on the same trajectory. Java has added a lot of pretty good features since Kotlin first came on the scene, and the gap has narrowed considerably. The one thing enormous thing that Kotlin has that cannot be replicated easily in Java is null safety. But lately, most of the other features in Kotlin either make me long for something more powerful like Scala or shrug and just fall back to Java.
Admittedly, I don't do much Android development, and that was a big driver of Kotlin's adoption early on. So maybe it has more of a foothold there than on the server.
Re: Civet: A Superset of TypeScript
#43Civet. Kopi luwak coffee. It's CoffeeScript. I wrote a bunch of CoffeeScript back in the day, and everyone I've spoken to about it feels the same, that it was a bad idea in hindsight, and a language dead end. The language was only syntactic sugar, and by not bringing anything else to the table, was unconvincing for ports and support in other ecosystems. It now seems that most codebases have been decaffeinated though.…
> I wrote a bunch of CoffeeScript back in the day, and everyone I've spoken to about it feels the same, that it was a bad idea in hindsight I don't think it was a bad idea in hindsight. JS of the era was a pain to use; CoffeeScript made writing and reading things much easier, which is the reason it took off. Since then things changed and many "CoffeeScript features" are now "JavaScript features". Only with knowledge…
> CoffeeScript made writing and reading things much easier
My point is that it kinda didn't. It looked prettier on the surface, but didn't actually solve any of the deeper problems of writing JavaScript. To write CoffeeScript you had to still know JavaScript and all its oddities.
TypeScript solved those problems, and that's why it has taken off and had a meteoric rise to the point that it's practically synonymous with JavaScript.
> I also think CoffeeScript was probably helpful in getting some of these features adopted in the first place.
This may be true, but if so that suggests a benefit as a research language not a production language.
Re: Civet: A Superset of TypeScript
#44What does this do? operator {min, max} := Math value min ceiling max floor Is that a declaration or an invocation?
It looks like rubyist brainrot
Re: Civet: A Superset of TypeScript
#45No relation to CivetWeb
Re: Civet: A Superset of TypeScript
#46If you find this interesting, you might also wanna suss out https://rescript-lang.org/
It is a shame that Bloomberg and Facebook made the whole situation pretty confusing though, but still, it is a nice idea.
Re: Civet: A Superset of TypeScript
#47Civet. Kopi luwak coffee. It's CoffeeScript. I wrote a bunch of CoffeeScript back in the day, and everyone I've spoken to about it feels the same, that it was a bad idea in hindsight, and a language dead end. The language was only syntactic sugar, and by not bringing anything else to the table, was unconvincing for ports and support in other ecosystems. It now seems that most codebases have been decaffeinated though.…
CoffeeScript was not only a great idea but also successful beyond its adoption. It influenced and inspired many features that JavaScript later incorporated, such as arrow functions and destructuring assignments. Over time, JavaScript evolved to the point where the few quality of life improvements offered by CoffeeScript no longer justified learning an entirely new syntax.
And beyond this, there’s very much a world where a few key people don’t discover Jeremy Ashkenas’ work - much of which, between CoffeeScript and Backbone, was the excitement that you could make JS feel agile - at the right time in their careers to push the industry in the direction where frontend developers become frontend engineers. We owe so much to these stepping stones.
Re: Civet: A Superset of TypeScript
#48Some of these seem good to me: - "everything is an expression" is a nicer solution for conditional assignments and returns than massive ternary expressions - the pipe operator feels familiar from Elixir and is somewhat similar to Clojure's threading macros. - being able to use the spread operator in the middle of an array? Sure, I guess. I want to like the pattern matching proposal, but the syntax looks slightly too…
For “everything is an expression” https://github.com/tc39/proposal-do-expressions may be of interest, though discussion seems to have paused.
Re: Civet: A Superset of TypeScript
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wrote a bunch of CoffeeScript back in the day, and everyone I've spoken to about it feels the same, that it was a bad idea in hindsight I don't think it was a bad idea in hindsight. JS of the era was a pain to use; CoffeeScript made writing and reading things much easier, which is the reason it took off. Since then things changed and many "CoffeeScript features" are now "JavaScript features". Only with knowledge…
> CoffeeScript made writing and reading things much easier My point is that it kinda didn't. It looked prettier on the surface, but didn't actually solve any of the deeper problems of writing JavaScript. To write CoffeeScript you had to still know JavaScript and all its oddities. TypeScript solved those problems, and that's why it has taken off and had a meteoric rise to the point that it's practically synonymous wit…
Coffeescript had some great features: classes, array comprehensions, default parameter values, arrow functions, optional chaining. Many of these eventually made it to ecmascript.
And then it ruined us with implicit returns, optional parentheses and brackets, and the isnt vs is not fiasco.
I worked a lot with Python and coffeescript at the same time back in the day. In Python you mess up your whitespace and 95% of the time it's an indentation error. In coffeescript it's a valid program that means something completely different than what you intended. Combined with the optional punctuation, which the community encouraged leaning into, it was far too easy to write ambiguous code that you and the compiler would come to different interpretations of.
Re: Civet: A Superset of TypeScript
#50|> is such a breath of fresh air when otherwise stuck without it, or worse being forced to do OOP style "design your abstraction before your logic".