3 ms·
Arguably, newcomers to whom using CS instead of JS would be a challenge are precisely those who should be encouraged to switch. That aside, yes, I do think you
by Cushman 16y ago
Arguably, newcomers to whom using CS instead of JS would be a challenge are precisely those who should be encouraged to switch.
That aside, yes, I do think you're reading it wrong— since CoffeScript compiles straight into JS, there isn't really any meaningful way for it to "replace" it. It's just adding a layer on top.
- bcrescimanno 16y agoI've said before that CoffeeScript is not a "replacement" or "alternative' to JS since it "compiles" to javascript--but in this case you're talking about providing source that users will have to interact with in a language in which they may not be familiar. Yes, it ultimately becomes Javascript--but what about the javascript developer who wants to learn rails? I'm sure coffeescript is a fine language in its own right--but the fact that it has to generate Javascript code rather than something lower-level is frustrating to me. I haven't dug into it enough to know; but my gut tells me that (like other examples of code attempting to "compile to another programming language") the output from the "compiler" is less than quality code. Maybe, in most cases, this is fine. In some environments though where performance is at a premium, I don't know that CS will output well optimized code.
- Cushman 16y agoAll I can say is you should dig into it. Your gut is thoroughly misinformed.
- chc 16y agoYour gut feeling isn't exactly misguided, since it's generally a safe bet that $LANGUAGE generates suboptimal code, but it's wrong in CoffeeScript's case. CoffeeScript's generated code is much better optimized than 99.99% of the code you'll read out there. BTW, I'm the one who accidentally downvoted you. Sorry about that. I need to be more careful with the clicking.