11 ms·
I don't think I've ever heard of any in-production, large apps in Coffeescript, even from when it was at its peak. I know of a handful of companies that tried i
by scrollaway 6y ago
I don't think I've ever heard of any in-production, large apps in Coffeescript, even from when it was at its peak. I know of a handful of companies that tried it and even enjoyed it quite a bit but none of it was for mass consumption.
Typescript, meanwhile, is used for hugely popular apps, is used by very large companies, has Microsoft's full backing, etc.
The two are not comparable.
Edit: Clearly I'm misremembering its popularity.
- ForHackernews 6y agoAt one time, Dropbox and Github were all-in on Coffeescript e.g. https://web.archive.org/web/20130815075924/https://github.com/styleguide/javascript https://web.archive.org/web/20130815075924/https://github.co...
- ChrisLTD 6y agoWasn’t CoffeeScript the preferred way to write JS in Ruby on Rails for years?
- scrose 6y agoI think the Rails resource generators still default to creating Coffeescript files. I could be wrong though — I switch between Rails 4,5 and 6 projects right now. I’ve been on over a dozen Rails projects at different companies and only ever worked one project that used Coffeescript in production, and that was an app built pre-2010.
- nullserver 6y agoHAML and coffeescript.
- aendruk 6y agoI miss the elegance of Haml. Moving from an indented syntax for DOM literals to the likes of JSX felt like a step backwards.
- scrollaway 6y agoMaybe for you, but that is not a popular opinion. JSX's rigor is a breath of fresh air in a world that constantly generates low quality html due to loose constraints. HAML had those same problems. JSX is kind of xml done "right". Differences between children and attributes in xml is very hard to grasp, but JSX has a much better defined structure to it and is super well suited to generate html because of that.
- aendruk 6y agoThis sounds like an orthogonal point. (I agree with it, so it feels odd to see it presented as a rebuttal.) Surely an indented syntax could have rigor if we wanted it to?
- scrollaway 6y agoSure, if we wanted it to, but HAML wasn't that.
- aendruk 6y agoYes.
- jitl 6y agoA significant portion of Airbnb was written in Coffeescript, including most of the complex app-like stuff used by hosts to manage listings and calendars. We ported off of Coffeescript when ES6 and Babel came out, and you could start writing `class` and using `() => {...}` function expressions with lexical `this` scoping. Coffeescript lost because it stood still next to the ecosystem and next to the new Ecmascript language standards, which obliviated its advantages. The only advantage Coffeescript had over ES6 was “some of your code is already written in it”. Once Ecmascript formalizes a type system, we’ll see the same process happen with Typescript. But, I think it will be many years before that sort of feature is standardized. In the mean time, I’m happy to use Typescript today.
- akavi 6y agoPagerDuty’s front end was 100% coffeescript until at least 2016
- bananabreakfast 6y agoSquare's entire merchant dashboard was in CoffeeScript. Half a million lines of code. Took over a year to convert to ES6.