3 ms·
How is that not the case for any language? (This also might be a bad example, but it was based off of code I wrote)
by qrush 15y ago
How is that not the case for any language?
(This also might be a bad example, but it was based off of code I wrote)
- davidw 15y agoJust as a data point, most "on top of" languages seem a bit more distant from what they sit on top of. In other words, C is somewhat cross platform, and much higher level than assembler. Ruby does way more out of the box than C does. Coffeescript seems to mostly just be a modified JavaScript syntax, although I have to admit I haven't looked at it that closely.
- SoftwareMaven 15y agoThat's all C++ originally was, too. Everything has to start somewhere, and fixing some of JavaScript's warts is as good a place to start as anywhere.
- dstein 15y agoCoffeescript is adding an abstraction level, but all the complexity of JavaScript remains, so while you write Coffeescript, you have to sort of compile it in your head. I could maybe get on board if it went one whole level of abstraction further.
- adambard 15y agoI disagree; I think the more standard handling of `this` and the automagic variable scoping, constitute a significant reduction in complexity for people coming from other OO languages. Certainly for me, having more experience with Python and Ruby than Javascript. The abridged syntax is just gravy.