When talking about compiling computer languages. It would help if we were all using the standard definition of a compiler. I'm glad you've got your own definit

When talking about compiling computer languages. It would help if we were all using the standard definition of a compiler. I'm glad you've got your own definition but using it only serves to confuse the discussion. Furthermore, your argument is weak. The only reason you don't need to be more familiar with the technologies supporting gcc and javac is because they are robust and much older. If you were there at the beginning of their development you most certainly would have needed to be more familiar with their underlying platforms. In fact many would argue you'd be a better programmer if you did now. Another reason your argument could be weak: Does a line number mapper between coffeescript and its generated javascript completely nullify your argument? At that point I wouldn't need to ever look at the generated source and would care only about it's execution. That sounds pretty much exactly like a "compiled" language to me.