Hmmm, then what does the Google Closure Compiler mean?
CoffeeScript Means Giving Up on JavaScript
61–70 of 71 posts
Re: CoffeeScript Means Giving Up on JavaScript
#62It's very gratifying to see how overwhelmingly the comments are both positive and in disagreement with Michael's blog post. If you'd like to see the most complete explanation of why CoffeeScript is all about working with and embracing JavaScript -- not giving up on it -- the best resource is probably Brendan Eich's and my joint talk at this year's JSConf: http://blip.tv/jsconf/jsconf2011-jeremy-ashkenas-5258082 But t…
Why haven't you tried it yet? I have tried it, and I love it (same goes for Backbone and Underscore, by the way - you are the developer who's work has impacted me the most positively in the past year) but I haven't used it for anything serious yet, and here's why: the workflow is more complicated than "make change, refresh". Until very recently, my programming time was split about equally between the three major oper…
If that's truly all that's stopping you, try out Middleman (http://middlemanapp.com/) or my own Draughtsman (https://github.com/stdbrouw/draughtsman). Taking two minutes to install an app hopefully does not constitute "wasting time futzing around with build systems" :-)
Also, I think your problem is very particular to front-end devs and designers-that-code. If you're already doing back-end in your framework of choice, adding CoffeeScript or any kind of precompilation into the mix is usually just a one-liner in a config file away.
Re: CoffeeScript Means Giving Up on JavaScript
#63Let me try a little experiment here:
While many of you will probably disagree with me, I find the trend towards writing in languages that compile to machine language somewhat alarming. The most notable of these languages C, and it's one that has gained a good degree of traction over the last year or so.
While I like and applaud the intention of these languages, I question their necessity and worry about the knowledge gap they create. More importantly, they all fail by requiring that you be an expert in two languages. Let's face it, you can't just program C without knowing machine language, unless you're willing to defer debugging to someone who does. If we're already willing to learn both languages and then spend time reading and debugging compiled C, why not just write good machine language from the start? For the extra effort you'll make learning C and its idiosyncrasies, why not put it towards really learning machine language?
Hmm?
Re: CoffeeScript Means Giving Up on JavaScript
#64I understand the gravitation for languages that compile to javascript, but personally I've really come to enjoy programming JS. One thing that I don't really get is the fact that most compile-to-js languages are seemingly just switching out the syntax and not actually improving what can be done with the language.
The only useful (as in, I would actually use it) project I've come across in this realm is parenscript (http://common-lisp.net/project/parenscript/) which compiles a variant of lisp into javascript. It seems to me the best way to go from language X to JS is to make sure X is actually a better language. From my (admittedly small) experience with CoffeeScript, I haven't really seen much of the benefit, and I tend to NOT like CS syntax. Also, javascript is a superbly powerful language in my experience, and trying to replace it would take some real thought and work.
It seems to me that taking an extremely powerful (and terse) language and compiling it to javascript would be more useful than switching out JS' syntax and adding a few easily-replicable features. Then again, maybe I'm just ignorant.
I don't really see what's to replace, though. JS ain't that bad.
Re: CoffeeScript Means Giving Up on JavaScript
#65I DON'T LIKE CoffeeScript either, it's more Ruby like, why can't people just love JavaScript for what it is. Please read the good parts by Crockford or listen to his talks!
it's a big fat "meh" for a lot of people, if you look at the coffeescript source even it looks like complete ass with the exception of the parser, which looks pretty nice and declarative. Some things are certainly nice to have, but those are neither unique nor necessary. The best thing to come out of coffeescript is the glaring "dont use me, I dont understand JavaScript" it places on libraries written with it, I like that.
Re: CoffeeScript Means Giving Up on JavaScript
#66To quote the author: "For the extra effort you'll make learning CoffeeScript and its idiosyncrasies, why not put it towards really learning JavaScript?" There are so many wrong saying in this statement. First, understand that CoffeeScript is JavaScript - but without its idiosyncrasies. If you know JavaScript really well, learning coffeescript takes minutes. CoffeeScript embraces closures and prototype inheritence; it…
writing trivial transpilers is where it's at
Re: CoffeeScript Means Giving Up on JavaScript
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why haven't you tried it yet? I have tried it, and I love it (same goes for Backbone and Underscore, by the way - you are the developer who's work has impacted me the most positively in the past year) but I haven't used it for anything serious yet, and here's why: the workflow is more complicated than "make change, refresh". Until very recently, my programming time was split about equally between the three major oper…
If that's truly all that's stopping you, try out Middleman ( http://middlemanapp.com/ ) or my own Draughtsman ( https://github.com/stdbrouw/draughtsman ). Taking two minutes to install an app hopefully does not constitute "wasting time futzing around with build systems" :-) Also, I think your problem is very particular to front-end devs and designers-that-code. If you're already doing back-end in your framework of ch…
Cool, I will take a look!
And not every back-end dev is lucky enough to be working in their framework of choice ;) (I would actually call myself more of a front-end guy, but I do plenty of back-end work and the only time I get to use frameworks I enjoy - Django, Flask, etc - is for my side projects.)
Re: CoffeeScript Means Giving Up on JavaScript
#68It's very gratifying to see how overwhelmingly the comments are both positive and in disagreement with Michael's blog post. If you'd like to see the most complete explanation of why CoffeeScript is all about working with and embracing JavaScript -- not giving up on it -- the best resource is probably Brendan Eich's and my joint talk at this year's JSConf: http://blip.tv/jsconf/jsconf2011-jeremy-ashkenas-5258082 But t…
I'm heavily using CS for my new business and I absolutely love it. I can't thank you enough for being brilliant enough to create it.
Re: CoffeeScript Means Giving Up on JavaScript
#69I DON'T LIKE CoffeeScript either, it's more Ruby like, why can't people just love JavaScript for what it is. Please read the good parts by Crockford or listen to his talks!
it's a big fat "meh" for a lot of people, if you look at the coffeescript source even it looks like complete ass with the exception of the parser, which looks pretty nice and declarative. Some things are certainly nice to have, but those are neither unique nor necessary. The best thing to come out of coffeescript is the glaring "dont use me, I dont understand JavaScript" it places on libraries written with it, I like…
I'm so waiting for your eventual "I was wrong, CoffeeScript is awesome" post. Someday TJ! Someday
Re: CoffeeScript Means Giving Up on JavaScript
#70I too was a crotchety old, "get of my javascript lawn", type guy. I thought coffeescript was for lazy developers who just didn't want to write good javascript. Then I decided to use it when I was evaluating a framework, because that framework had chosen to dive fully into coffeescript. All of their examples were cs, so I figured, "what the heck." Even though I didn't stay with that framework, I am so glad I gave cs a try. It has been a huge blessing in rapid development. Having used it for five weeks now, I can definitely sing it's praises. You still need to have a good understanding of javascript, and there are obviously a few gotchas, but it has really changed my who coding experience. I'm in the minority in my office, in that I actually love javascript, but for those who hate it with a passion, introducing them to coffeescript has gotten them on the js train.