Re:CoffeeScript: less typing, bad readability
by jaequery on Monday September 17, 2012 @05:01PM
(#4534872)
"Instead, it's about having shorter, more expressive code."
yes, but at the expense of a lot of other negative baggages that comes along with it. by having it's own compiler rather than leaving that to the browser seems like it's opening a can of worms.
and just reading from the comments, i can see how we could soon see a birth of "another language", that's supposed to be solve all problems coffeescript'ers face.
for one, i guess readability seems to be the common problem, which isn't good for productivity.
Re:CoffeeScript: less typing, bad readability
by encoderer on Tuesday September 18, 2012 @11:33AM
(#4538630)
It sounds like you haven't ever used CoffeeScript?
Don't you find it a little odd that you have such strong opinions on something you've never even tried?
Re:CoffeeScript: less typing, bad readability
by SoftwareMaven on Monday September 17, 2012 @10:12PM
(#4535932)
i can see how we could soon see a birth of "another language", that's supposed to be solve all problems coffeescript'ers face
That's called incremental progress a d most people see it as a good thing. Others yell, "Get off my lawn!"
So you had jQuery experience and were inhibited by working on a MooTools project. I get that, makes total sense.
But then you say that switching to CoffeeScript may seem like a better long term choice but "in reality it is not so much."
Surely MooTools would've been fine for you as a long term choice.
Yes, there is a penalty to switching. Whether it's jQuery to MooTools, JS to CS, whatever. But that doesn't make it a bad long term choice.
Also, CoffeeScript is more than just saving keystrokes. That makes it seem like it's all about initial up-front cost savings. Instead, it's about having shorter, more expressive code. That pays dividends for the life of a project.