3 ms·

While I don't disagree about the point regarding the relationship between line count and bug count, I'm very wary of this move because they still haven't solved

• azakai 15y ago
  Yes, until there are proper stack traces in CoffeeScript, it's very hard for me to adopt it for anything. A project I work on has a small amount of CoffeeScript, and debugging problems in that component is the hardest part of the whole project.
• nas 15y ago
  That's an implementation detail though. Although it's a lot of work to fix, it's not insurmountable. You would need your development browser to support Coffescript natively. It's not really a serious problem if IE7 generates a Javascript back-trace, right? The important thing is if Coffeescript really does significantly reduce line count and by extension bug rates. I'm not sure it does, generally syntactical sugar doesn't have that effect. I hope it does. My life seems nicer when writing Coffeescript vs JS.
  • ricardobeat 15y ago
    You don't need to support CoffeeScript natively. The answer is simple and is called source mapping: the output code carries comments that map each line to a line in the source file. This will also work for LESS and any other transpilers. Work is underway since August to implement it in WebKit (http://peter.sh/2012/01/css-selector-profiler-source-mapping-and-software-rendering/ http://peter.sh/2012/01/css-selector-profiler-source-mapping...) and Gecko (https://wiki.mozilla.org/DevTools/Features/SourceMap https://wiki.mozilla.org/DevTools/Features/SourceMap - the intern has gone back to school, really?)