twykke

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.

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.

list comprehensions was exactly what i was talking about :) however i replace them with lodash and ramda, which benefit enormously from CS's lambda syntax

some colleagues of mine have complained about the significant whitespace being difficult to understand. i can't argue with something subjective like that.

however i like to point that our entire codebase, CS, JS, TS, Python, Java, Swift, 100% of it already has significant whitespace.

...it's just that the JS/TS/Java also have curly brackets.

i also don't use CoffeeScript because of any 'feature' it has over standard JS but instead because of its concise but expressive syntax. it's less about what it does have/do, and more about what it doesn't have/do.

some small aspects of CS i forgo because they (in my opinion) are a little too concise such that they sacrifice readability, but all in all it has my favorite syntax of any language.

spread some love for moonscript (and its inspiration coffeescript of course, my daily bread-and-butter) - to my mind the best possible syntax for a (dynamic) programming language. python being second place.

is it possible to get a tattoo with significant whitespace?

all our opsworks servers have been unreachable from the internet since around 05:13Z when we see a mysterious 'configure' command with no further details in the opsworks logs

EDIT: they are in EU-West zone btw

Can we all agree that the amount of humans which the Earth's (mass/surface area/volume/energy/environment/resources/what-have-you) can support is finite? Can we also agree that the ideal number of humans on Earth is somewhere between 0 and this finite limit?

In this case, I would simply argue that the ideal amount is somewhat lower than the amount of humans which would necessitate covering the entire Earth's landmass and oceans with a planet-sized city, obliterating all natural landforms and all species except those found in factory farms and zoos.

I guess what I am trying to say is, if we consider overpopulation not to be a problem, then we must believe that humans are wise enough to stop multiplying before Earth becomes a monoculture. This is the argument that I find hard to believe.