StitchIt - CommonJS Module packager for ASP.NET
Prototype of packaging JavaScript, client-side templates and CoffeeScript into CommonJS Modules for the browser using ASP.NET.
davidpadbury
Re:Making Macros in CoffeeScript
on Friday September 16, 2011 @07:25PM (#3006714)
Yeah - this has been posted way too many times. There was some work on significantly modifying the CoffeeScript compiler to add static metaprogramming (macros+more) but I don't think it's gone anywhere recently - https://github.com/fab13n/parsec-coffee-script.
The real point of the article was to draw attention to how extensible the CoffeeScript compiler can be. Jeremy talks about this when presenting the language and it's recently been used in a couple interesting ways like contracts.coffee (http://disnetdev.com/contracts.coffee/).
Re:WinRT demystified
on Thursday September 15, 2011 @04:25PM (#3001969)
(I don't know if that's what they call it in C# 5.)
Tasks - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.threading.tas....
Re:Spotify's U.S. Landing Page
on Wednesday July 06, 2011 @01:11PM (#2734857)
I've been paying for Spotify in the UK and been using the desktop client without any tricks in the US since moving here. The big problem is that the Spotify iPhone app isn't available in the US app store. Is there anyway around this?
Re:Spotify's U.S. Landing Page
on Wednesday July 06, 2011 @01:05PM (#2734823)
Grooveshark is great and since moving the US I've used it a lot. Where I think Spotify wins out over Grooveshark is the quality of their music library. I frequently find that albums on Grooveshark are missing tracks, in the incorrect order, or are incorrectly named. I guess it's a little thing but it feels like a big difference.
Re:Making Macros in CoffeeScript
on Sunday June 26, 2011 @06:59PM (#2699377)
It's actually working on the CoffeeScript AST. Admittedly the example I used doesn't demonstrate this particularly well.
Re:WCF WebSockets
on Thursday January 13, 2011 @10:39AM (#2100097)
Yeah - A "hoo-haw" is good. The quicker issues are brought to attention and resolved the better.
Re:WCF WebSockets
on Thursday January 13, 2011 @10:22AM (#2100033)
By "in flux" I was intending to vaguely refer to the problems with the protocol which has led Firefox and Opera to ship with WebSockets disabled. I'm guessing we're probably going to see some changes to it in the future. Hopefully sooner rather than later.
I honestly don't know a thing about the version of the protocol that they've implemented. It looks like one that they (Microsoft) have submitted - http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-montenegro-hybi-upgrade-hel....
That's cool you're seeing so many clients with WebSockets enabled.
Re:WCF WebSockets
on Thursday January 13, 2011 @09:44AM (#2099897)
The WebSocket protocol is still very much in flux. This drop is only to give an idea of the server side API would look like (I think anyways). I imagine as the protocol calms down they'll implement whatever's decided on.
Re:WCF WebSockets
on Thursday January 13, 2011 @09:29AM (#2099846)
No where near as interesting. Windows Communication Foundation - a networking stack for .NET. Sorry.
Re:Making macros in CoffeeScript
on Thursday December 09, 2010 @09:57AM (#1987633)
Yep - that's probably the best bit.