4 ms·
There are many differences. One is that CoffeeScript will always need to be compiled. Code written in, e.g. ES7, will not have to be compiled down with Babel an
by hyperdunc 10y ago
There are many differences. One is that CoffeeScript will always need to be compiled. Code written in, e.g. ES7, will not have to be compiled down with Babel anymore once browsers in the wild all support ES7.
Also, AFAIK CoffeeScript restricts you to using JS features found in ES5.
- spraak 10y agoCoffeeScript is most similar to ES6 but with some slight differences in syntax and style
- 6t6t6t6 10y agoI have the intuition that the plans of the developers of the future version of JS are that you will always have to transpille the code. https://youtu.be/3pKNRgResq0 https://youtu.be/3pKNRgResq0 On the other hand, I think that the time of CoffeeScript has passed. It made some sense before Babel but now, IMHO, it is only for Ruby developers who don't like the syntax of JavaScript.
- douche 10y agoAt this point, JavaScript is inching closer and closer to just being assembly language for the web. I think things will get very interesting indeed once WebAssembly really starts to be a real thing.
- 6t6t6t6 10y agoAnd this day maybe we will not need JavaScript anymore... ;)
- seanparsons 10y agoLiterally can't wait for this.
- mrspeaker 10y agoWhat a way to go.
- fnovd 10y agoAs a Ruby developer who doesn't like the syntax of JavaScript, Babel and ES6+ have changed my perspective. After the initial hurdle of figuring out what the hell webpack, babel, and npm (now yarn) were doing, I've found Javascript to be outright pleasant to use.