News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:CoffeeScript for TypeScript by jacknews on Monday February 27, 2023 @06:06PM (#34963287)
+1 for tofeescript.

'Civet' certainly implies your code is being processed, but I'm not sure the connotation is desirable.

And all IMHO of course, but significant-whitespace is the worst idea ever.

Re:CoffeeScript for TypeScript by capableweb on Monday February 27, 2023 @06:07PM (#34963313)
> significant-whitespace is the worst idea ever

Hear hear! I never heard a single argument for significant invisible characters that makes sense, ever.

Who would want to have a program that fails because you used invisible character X instead of invisible character Y?

Re:CoffeeScript for TypeScript by lmm on Tuesday February 28, 2023 @01:06AM (#34966221)
A distinction between invisible character X and invisible character Y is a terrible idea. But indentation is very much visible; it's generally more significant to the reader than braces are, so it should be that significant to the computer too.
Re:CoffeeScript for TypeScript by Yahivin on Monday February 27, 2023 @06:56PM (#34963836)
Civets, they're nature's transpilers.
Re:CoffeeScript for TypeScript by nkozyra on Monday February 27, 2023 @07:00PM (#34963865)
> I'm not sure the connotation is desirable.

You'd think not, and yet ...

Re:CoffeeScript for TypeScript by chowells on Tuesday February 28, 2023 @01:13AM (#34966242)
Wait, what's wrong with making sure indentation and code structure are always the same? Lying indentation structure is always wrong.
Re:CoffeeScript for TypeScript by jacknews on Tuesday February 28, 2023 @08:00AM (#34968778)
It's easy to auto-format according to character syntax, not so easy when the format is the syntax.

Simple copy/paste is enough to break significant-whitespace, let alone space-vs-tabs, etc, etc.

But again, all IMHO, I realise it has it's fans.