3 ms·

> It is questionable. > I don't mean to talk a bunch of trash about the idea, because it is a cool one and undoubtedly would be a great learning project. Howev

by jMyles 11y ago

> It is questionable. > I don't mean to talk a bunch of trash about the idea, because it is a cool one and undoubtedly would be a great learning project. However, in trying to compile down to both Python and JS, you'll end up with a lowest common denominator language. Aside from libraries, it isn't obvious what compiling down to Python gives you; just use Coffeescript or something similar for your entire stack if for some reason ES6 is not an option. > Truthfully you are just better off biting the bullet and getting good at multiple languages which are the best fit to their domains. The best tool for the job and all. Python is a good language, but not great enough to warrant hanging onto if/where it has been eclipsed. My motivation isn't a love for Python (although I do confess one), but contempt for javascript. I do like coffeescript just fine, so my solution is to "just Coffeescript" most of the time. However - and I know I'm not alone here - I end up having to not only repeat but re-represent crucial pieces of logic in both Python (in a model method) and Coffeescript (in a scope method) in order to have complete coherence over my app. In 2015, it doesn’t need to be this way.

klibertp 11y ago
> but contempt for javascript Opinions like this make me very sad. And not because I love JavaScript: I love all the languages (take a look if you want to see the list: https://klibert.pl/articles/programming_langs.html https://klibert.pl/articles/programming_langs.html). It's sad, because we have now more languages than ever before, yet almost no one uses them, because they all "contempt" some of them, "dislike" others and are "not interested" in the rest. "Using the best tool for the job" was never that easy, yet nobody wants to do it, choosing to try and translate completely incompatible semantics and features of one tool on top of another. It's really disappointing. This presentation sums up my dreams about how development should look like pretty nicely: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qluiQgbXZBQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qluiQgbXZBQ
- ralmidani 11y ago
  > It's sad, because we have now more languages than ever before, yet almost no one uses them, because they all "contempt" some of them, "dislike" others and are "not interested" in the rest. "Using the best tool for the job" was never that easy, yet nobody wants to do it, choosing to try and translate completely incompatible semantics and features of one tool on top of another. It's really disappointing. JS is used to develop client-side web applications not because it's the best language for the job, but because it's the only language supported by all browsers. Those who like the philosophy and/or reach of the Web but don't want to use JS have no alternative to using languages like CoffeeScript.
  - klibertp 11y ago
    > Those who like the philosophy and/or reach of the Web but don't want to use JS have no alternative to using languages like CoffeeScript. Could you explain what you mean by "languages like CoffeeScript"? If you mean it as "languages compiled to JS" then many of them are completely unlike Coffee in both syntax and semantics. There's a great many of them to choose from, too. But I think you completely missed my point, which is that you have an alternative for JS (in the form of compile to JS languages, but why should it matter if a language is compiled to JVM bytecode of JS code? It's an implementation detail!). You have an alternative for every single language out there, and a wide array of languages optimized for different use cases. Yet, instead of embracing this diversity, people try to push their favorite[1] language everywhere. Yeah, it's easier to write something that way, but until we have "sufficiently smart compilers" the effect is going to be worse than if you just used a best-suited language for each component of your system. [1] Maybe because it's the only one they know?

by jMyles 11y ago

klibertp 11y ago

> but contempt for javascript Opinions like this make me very sad. And not because I love JavaScript: I love all the languages (take a look if you want to see the list: https://klibert.pl/articles/programming_langs.html https://klibert.pl/articles/programming_langs.html). It's sad, because we have now more languages than ever before, yet almost no one uses them, because they all "contempt" some of them, "dislike" others and are "not interested" in the rest. "Using the best tool for the job" was never that easy, yet nobody wants to do it, choosing to try and translate completely incompatible semantics and features of one tool on top of another. It's really disappointing. This presentation sums up my dreams about how development should look like pretty nicely: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qluiQgbXZBQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qluiQgbXZBQ

ralmidani 11y ago
> It's sad, because we have now more languages than ever before, yet almost no one uses them, because they all "contempt" some of them, "dislike" others and are "not interested" in the rest. "Using the best tool for the job" was never that easy, yet nobody wants to do it, choosing to try and translate completely incompatible semantics and features of one tool on top of another. It's really disappointing. JS is used to develop client-side web applications not because it's the best language for the job, but because it's the only language supported by all browsers. Those who like the philosophy and/or reach of the Web but don't want to use JS have no alternative to using languages like CoffeeScript.
- klibertp 11y ago
  > Those who like the philosophy and/or reach of the Web but don't want to use JS have no alternative to using languages like CoffeeScript. Could you explain what you mean by "languages like CoffeeScript"? If you mean it as "languages compiled to JS" then many of them are completely unlike Coffee in both syntax and semantics. There's a great many of them to choose from, too. But I think you completely missed my point, which is that you have an alternative for JS (in the form of compile to JS languages, but why should it matter if a language is compiled to JVM bytecode of JS code? It's an implementation detail!). You have an alternative for every single language out there, and a wide array of languages optimized for different use cases. Yet, instead of embracing this diversity, people try to push their favorite[1] language everywhere. Yeah, it's easier to write something that way, but until we have "sufficiently smart compilers" the effect is going to be worse than if you just used a best-suited language for each component of your system. [1] Maybe because it's the only one they know?