I find Coffeescript hard to read. Especially when dealing with nested callbacks (e.x.: when you have to nest, such as with Jasmine `describe` and `it` blocks for testing).
Here's an interesting thread on the "cons" of using Coffeescript: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6527316
I do like ES6!
I'm a big JS fan. I can't stand Coffeescript - it doesn't seem to add anything except changing the syntax to make it easier for Rubyists to understand. Which is fine, I guess, but feels like a personal preference. More like a text editor setting than something anyone should publish their code in.
Same for Typescript, to a certain extent, though I understand the heartfelt desire to have the compiler pick up some of the more common errors.
We run the risk of fragmenting the community by promoting CS and TS - better to evolve JS itself, which is what is happening and it's great.
TL;DR: kill Coffeescript and Typescript, evolve Javascript for the win!
And that language shouldn't be used by beginners in 2016 due to its uncertain fate in the long run as its creator kind of abandoned the project. Furhtermore ES2015 adds many CS features to the language.
Don't know about LiveScript, but frankly that whole transpilation thing is a mess. People don't use Transpilers for Python or Ruby. They work with the language quirks.
Unfortunately, many of the ES6 features inspired by CoffeeScript features are completely unoptimized and an order of magnitude slower in cutting-edge browsers than the CoffeeScript versions. Even more unfortunately, they don’t work at all in lots of browser versions people are still using today. Which means that they can’t really be adopted by most projects yet.
Finally, even if ES6 were implemented perfectly everywhere, it’s still much less pleasant (from a syntax clarity perspective) to read and write ES6 code than CoffeeScript code, at least for me.
At the point when the vast majority of browsers support ES6 features, it will perhaps be reasonable to change CoffeeScript to use them in its generated output. In the mean time, CS is fantastic as-is, and its generated code works efficiently in every browser.
But hey, use whatever language you like (ClojureScript, Elm, Dart, Haxe, ES6, whatever..). It’s your code, so the only people who should care are you and your close collaborators.
I happen to agree with the position that syntax that can be made implicit should be. CoffeeScript has done a good job of this. LiveScript has done an even better one. What are the arguments against using a syntactically cleaner language that compiles down to the exact same features?