For folks that are curious, we wanted to get these changes out the door -- strict mode syntax errors being a big one -- so that source maps can be the focus of the next release (probably 1.4.0).
Regarding source maps... it feels like the solution to the wrong problem. Why are we still pushing minified/obfuscated Javascript to the browser anyway? What's wrong with standardizing on a bytecode format instead (e.g. JVM)?
JVM in the browser had wide adoption and plenty of resources behind it, and failed miserably. Why should we try it again ?
We have learned JS, probably you forgot that you need to know it to learn CS?
This and debugging are my two biggest gripes about CoffeeScript. If you are saying this, then you probably never learned JavaScript to the extent that would be required to write what you are writing in CoffeeScript. Maybe that is a good thing and a testament to the power of CoffeeScript. I am currently working with a bunch of people who don't understand functional scope nor closures (fully). They do, however, underst…
You are making wide, sweeping judgements that are almost certainly not representative of the majority of people using CoffeeScript.
This and debugging are my two biggest gripes about CoffeeScript. If you are saying this, then you probably never learned JavaScript to the extent that would be required to write what you are writing in CoffeeScript. Maybe that is a good thing and a testament to the power of CoffeeScript. I am currently working with a bunch of people who don't understand functional scope nor closures (fully). They do, however, underst…
You are making wide, sweeping judgements that are almost certainly not representative of the majority of people using CoffeeScript.
They are accurate representations of the people I have met and worked with. The sad truth is that most people do not really know javascript.
We have learned JS, probably you forgot that you need to know it to learn CS?
This and debugging are my two biggest gripes about CoffeeScript. If you are saying this, then you probably never learned JavaScript to the extent that would be required to write what you are writing in CoffeeScript. Maybe that is a good thing and a testament to the power of CoffeeScript. I am currently working with a bunch of people who don't understand functional scope nor closures (fully). They do, however, underst…
Better you don't work with those people. I don't want to blame you for their lack of knowledge. But if you want to do them (and you and your project) some good, order them to learn JavaScript thoroughly (which includes the unexpected but regular features that deviate from other languages and the common pitfalls), and then go back to CS! CS inherits from JS and makes no sense without it and it fixes some pitfalls but just the ones that you can fix with the constraints and additions of a new grammar.
This is not the hard path but the only path to CS.
"CoffeeScript now prints a Generated by CoffeeScript VERSION header at the top of each compiled file." From what I can tell there's no switch to optionally disable this? I can see how it could be useful to keep unaware developers from making js changes in compiled files, but other than that, what other purpose does this serve?
The most important thing it does is tell you which version of CoffeeScript was used to generate the file. Inevitably, as more and more coffee-generated-JavaScript begins to wind up in more places, we don't want to end up in a situation where you have to use trial and error, or distant memory, to figure out which version to use to rebuild the JS.
This is now automatically inserted into the top of the generated javascript as of coffeescript 1.3