Is there any reason someone would use this as opposed to TypeScript? Seems like its just shooting yourself in the foot in terms of maintainability..
Announcing CoffeeScript 2
81–90 of 220 posts
Re: Announcing CoffeeScript 2
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
> implicit returns In my experience it has only been a problem when porting existing code bases. We only had to be a bit careful putting a return after a for loop at the end of a function so it doesn't build a list unnecessarily (otherwise implicit returns of unused random values don't hurt). For clarity, one of the few rules we have is to use return explicitly when a function is more than a single expression. > obje…
From the perspective of how it was intended to be used, you've got it exactly right. Just because you can implicitly return a braceless object, doesn't mean you should.
i tend to use an explicit return except in one-line functions; there are plenty of CS features you can forgo if you don't think they benefit you.
Re: Announcing CoffeeScript 2
#83[deleted]
Re: Announcing CoffeeScript 2
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
I admit it is a funny forum to ask this, but, hey, here we are. Thanks for the response. It seems your situation was unique, and you're definitely fortunate to have a department willing to make this agreement. The Average Joe more than likely can't pull this off, especially if the company can hire a replacement.
I'd say NYT was fortunate to have him, and realized it.
agreed, he's a star. And companies, rightfully so, do pretty much all they can to retain stars.
Re: Announcing CoffeeScript 2
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
>What's to stop the company from finding a replacement who can be up to speed with the code in a short amount of time? The fact that it's very, very hard and the competition is fierce? Also, this is not a romantic relationship we're talking about. If you leave your place of work, no matter how irreplaceable you are the company is going to carry on as best they can. If a year later you are available again and they sti…
The competition is fierce for whom? The company picking from a pool of developers, or the developers competing for the job? If the former, then the company is an advantageous position to pick someone from the pool. It's not like ZERO people will apply for the job. If you're talking about the latter, then it's irrelevant. I'm mainly focusing on the company.
> If the former, then the company is an advantageous position to pick someone from the pool. It's not like ZERO people will apply for the job
The pool of people as talented as jashkenas, that are looking for a job, and want to work in the NY Times is tiny.
Re: Announcing CoffeeScript 2
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
> booze, bribes, women Kind of curious about the "bribes" part...
Nothing too spectacular, I've got enough Spanish to talk through all of the border crossing paperwork comprehensively, which helps avoid problems with papers down the line. You have to get a temporary import/export permit and country-specific insurance every time you cross a border. I ended up crossing 33, so that's plenty of paperwork to potentially get fouled up on. And in some countries checkpoint cops love bustin…
> not NYT-standards behavior.
Are you kidding? Spin the bit about the border-crossing fixer into a homily about capitalism, italicize a list of the meats you ate, and you've got a Friedman column.
Re: Announcing CoffeeScript 2
#87As a CoffeeScript fan things were looking pretty bleak a year or two ago. In particular there was zero momentum for new features. How things have changed! Major kudos to Geoffrey Booth and all involved. Coffee's beautiful syntax combined with async/await has taken a lot of the 'ick' away from coding in JS, at least for me.
having used Coffeescript almost exclusively (in the Node.js world) for something like 6 years, async/await was the only feature i have been gnashing my teeth waiting for, but i wasn't even that impatient because i have also been using Fibers for just as long.
Re: Announcing CoffeeScript 2
#88Augh. Anytime I see a Coffescript project all I see is wasted money trying to recruit engineers who actually want to use it. 90% of people who write JavaScript roll their eyes and move on.
Re: Announcing CoffeeScript 2
#89Jeremy, First off thank you for Underscore, Backbone and CoffeeScript. Your work really has helped me and my development team. This question is a little off topic but one I've been wanting to ask for a long time: Last year you took a year off from The New York Times to ride your motorcycle across the Western Hemisphere. Just recently you were hired back at the paper, doing what it appears to be the same thing in the…
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15276996 and marked it off-topic.
Re: Announcing CoffeeScript 2
#90I can't imagine CoffeeScript will see much adoption these days as most people seem to think ES6+ is "good enough". I miss how concise functions are in CoffeeScript and also miss being able to do object literals without the braces. But there's no chance at all in convincing my team to adopt it, as modern JS really is "good enough".
i really wanted to like coffeescript, but the idea of compiling, transpiling or any other kind of piling of javascript just rubbed me the wrong way. this is true of scss, less and other css flavors too. i understand the problems these tools are trying to solve, but i don't like that you have to learn two (or more) grammars and syntaxes, and the quirky interactions between them, to get those benefits (because you can'…
If you automate it and it's part of your deployment pipeline, you'd hardly notice it's there. We use both SCSS and CS via Rails and it's a breeze. The occasional times when I don't understand why something is not working I go to the coffeescript website and read the transpiled code and it's usually obvious what's going on.