Live data from Hacker News

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

towerjs.org

61–70 of 118 posts

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

#61
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,…

I'm going to reply to my own comment in order to address the numerous responses all at once.

First, I'll establish some modest authority on the subject by pointing out that I've worked directly with Tim Caswell, who helped create CoffeeScript, at multiple jobs now. He's explained to me how they developed it and we've discussed the merits of it.

Second, I don't believe CoffeeScript is lacking merit. I make no claims of such. I'm actually happy that CoffeeScript exists in that I hope it brings more people into the JavaScript fold so long as it does not detract in ways like this.

Third, I understand what CoffeeScript is and how it works, but have chosen not to learn it. That's my prerogative and I make no claims to the superiority of that choice apart from my choosing it.

Fourth, I _could_ talk about how time is not free. Installing a CoffeeScript compiler, learning CoffeeScript, undertaking the mental frame of reference change necessary to switch between context, are equally not free, but I don't feel the need to further this defense as it has been made many _many_ times before, especially here on HN.

In reality, this is about none of the above. This is labeled as JavaScript when _it is not_. I repeat, CoffeeScript is _not_ JavaScript. To the many responses this will incite, I'd direct you to my points above. This is not intrinsically a bad thing. Far from it, if CoffeeScript was not different, it would not be relevant. It is its difference that makes it relevant. I will likely eventually learn CoffeeScript when it becomes necessary or worth it. In fact, I attempted to previously, but setting up auto-compilers, etc... took about 20 minutes too long, and given the insufficient value proposition, I didn't bother to finish learning it.

I come across many node/JavaScript/Github projects regularly and don't have the time to bother learning or using 90% of them, but I bookmark them because they are intriguing and I hope to have them if and when I do need or want to use them. That's 9/10 _JavaScript_ projects that I don't get to just because I don't have the time.

I'll repeat my main point because that is all my original comment was ever about, if CoffeeScript is not different, there's no point in it existing; if it is different, then it's a positive reason otherwise it would receive no attention; if it is positively different, then why not market it as such? It's obvious that those who point out that CoffeeScript is a dialect and compiles to JavaScript so it is therefore an acceptable mis-labeling are attempting to have their cake and eat it too at the expense of people like me that either have not taken the time to learn it yet, or do not care to for _numerous_ philosophical reasons which I defend are quite valid, though being a pragmatist, ultimately will not factor into my reasoning.

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

#63
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd have to already know CoffeeScript and Rails to benefit from this framework. I've used neither so personally I'd have a lot of trouble and a steep learning curve. This builds on top of two other frameworks (Connect and Express) so I imagine the dependency stack for this framework is really long which might make debugging painful.

When I'm unfamiliar with most of the items being discussed in an article here I usually refrain from commenting.

Items that are relevant to the link:

* JavaScript * Node.js * Connect * Express * CoffeeScript

He is unfamiliar with just one of those.

Why the downvote? His comment contributes to the discussion, unlike yours.

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

#65
post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't downvote him because of his civil comment about misleading comment, but because of his un-hackerish tone about him not planning to learn something that is completely relevant to his career (his description in his page is: I'm a JavaScript and Node nerd). Maybe I shouldn't have done it, but I really have nothing against him. I truly wanted him the best and downvoting his (IMO) wrong comment was an effort to m…

> I really think writing any script longer than 20 lines in JavaScript instead of CoffeeScript is stupid) I think OP will get by without your career advice pretty well.

You can never know! That's what I'm saying. it's not like learning a new programming paradigm (like functional) that will take days or weeks, it will take 10 minutes reading www.coffeescript.org front page to see if my career advice is right or wrong. You can't call yourself a nerd without knowing the most thriving dialect of that language... Specially if you're young and reading a hacker website.

I realy don't want to get into a virtual pointless argument, but just out of curiosity: do you know CoffeeScript? Because it's very strange to me that someone might be against using CoffeeScript and condemning it like that (its debugging is worse than JS, but on every other front it's the clear winner). if you're not familiar with it, I suggest you take a look at CoffeeScript.org to see how and why it differs from JavaScript.

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

#66
post #30
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…

you know JavaScript well and haven't bothered to "learn" the second-most-popular dialect?

Come on, what kind of percentage are we talking about here? Tiny. Absolutely tiny.

Take ten minutes right now and read through the CoffeeScript reference-- poof, you learned it. It is just JavaScript.

Well, you haven't learned it unless you memorised absolutely every aspect of it, which you're unlikely to do on a first read. And it isn't "just" JavaScript- it has significant whitespace, different object notation, etc. etc.

Don't get me wrong, I've started using CoffeeScript and I like it. But it's a tiny, tiny minority language. There are a ton of JavaScripters out there that haven't learnt it because they don't need or want it. That's their choice.

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

#67
post #61
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,…

I'm going to reply to my own comment in order to address the numerous responses all at once. First, I'll establish some modest authority on the subject by pointing out that I've worked directly with Tim Caswell, who helped create CoffeeScript, at multiple jobs now. He's explained to me how they developed it and we've discussed the merits of it. Second, I don't believe CoffeeScript is lacking merit. I make no claims o…

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 a while ago. I haven't written any JS code since I was 14 - 6 years ago - but started reading coffeescript.org and in 3 hours was able to do everything I wanted in CS. So for a JS master like yourself it wouldn't take longer than an hour to master CS too).

To me, your comment sounded like an abacus master who doesn't want to learn Arabic numbers and multiplication table, because he's too busy. And again, I have nothing against you and downvoting a comment on HN !== hating you and/or disagreeing with everything you say or think.

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

#68
post #19
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,…

It generates JavaScript. If you want to read JavaScript, it's there for you to do.

I think you'll have a hard time running their documentation through the Coffeescript compiler.

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

#69
post #61
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,…

I'm going to reply to my own comment in order to address the numerous responses all at once. First, I'll establish some modest authority on the subject by pointing out that I've worked directly with Tim Caswell, who helped create CoffeeScript, at multiple jobs now. He's explained to me how they developed it and we've discussed the merits of it. Second, I don't believe CoffeeScript is lacking merit. I make no claims o…

Wow, a lot of people are really defensive about coffeescript.

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

#70
post #30
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…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN