5 ms·

I didn't mind the coffeescript experience, but it's deeply hurtful to productivity to dev in a platform that doesn't end up winning.

hsn915 4y ago
Is it? I find most of the "winning" tech deeply unproductive. Have you tried developing in a project with Webpack and Redux? It's kind of its own little hell. Everything is way too slow and complicated. Tasks that should take 20 minutes take 3 hours.
- statictype 4y ago
  “Winning tech” may be less productive for a one-off single person project. But “losing tech” is unproductive when you have to maintain/upgrade your code over many years and onboard new developers into the team. It is unfortunate that the tech industry’s choice of tools is largely fashion-driven but that is the reality.
  - krapp 4y ago
    The problem is, the entirety of the javascript ecosystem is built for large teams doing multi-year enterprise projects, and so unless you're launching a social media startup or something, you have to wade through a swamp of unnecessary complexity.
- johnfn 4y ago
  Try again with Vite and useReducer and prepare to have your socks blown off.
  - hsn915 4y ago
    Even vite is slow. Just use esbuild directly. Jotai is much better for global state management.
yashap 4y ago
Yeah, I like a lot of the language features here, especially: - Everything is an expression - Pattern matching - Spread in any position - Dedented strings/templates However, I wouldn't use it, because the chance of it becoming abandonware that I just have to migrate off of later is way too high. I'll write a few extra TypeScript characters here and there for the stability.
- hyperfekt 4y ago
  Unless civet's compiled output is hard to read you could always just check in the compiled Typescript source and continue from there if it gets abandoned. Not much of a risk when the migration is built in by the way the tool works in normal use.
  - yashap 4y ago
    The compiled output seems pretty clean, but isn’t necessarily what you’d write by hand. e.g. adds things like anonymous functions called immediately, when you’d probably just write a named private function, that sort of thing.
tinco 4y ago
CoffeeScript did end up winning though, all of its important features ended up in the next Javascript spec. It was a bit sad to transition into the slightly less aesthetic next Javascript release, but it also felt triumphant. To me it feels like the CoffeeScript community won. Every time I type some Javascript that's actually not fragile and not absolute garbage, I remember it's because we as a community backed CoffeeScript, and that led to the browsers listening and adding its features to Javascript. I am certain we're doing the same thing now with Typescript.

hsn915 4y ago

Is it? I find most of the "winning" tech deeply unproductive. Have you tried developing in a project with Webpack and Redux? It's kind of its own little hell. Everything is way too slow and complicated. Tasks that should take 20 minutes take 3 hours.

statictype 4y ago
“Winning tech” may be less productive for a one-off single person project. But “losing tech” is unproductive when you have to maintain/upgrade your code over many years and onboard new developers into the team. It is unfortunate that the tech industry’s choice of tools is largely fashion-driven but that is the reality.
- krapp 4y ago
  The problem is, the entirety of the javascript ecosystem is built for large teams doing multi-year enterprise projects, and so unless you're launching a social media startup or something, you have to wade through a swamp of unnecessary complexity.
johnfn 4y ago
Try again with Vite and useReducer and prepare to have your socks blown off.
- hsn915 4y ago
  Even vite is slow. Just use esbuild directly. Jotai is much better for global state management.

yashap 4y ago

Yeah, I like a lot of the language features here, especially: - Everything is an expression - Pattern matching - Spread in any position - Dedented strings/templates However, I wouldn't use it, because the chance of it becoming abandonware that I just have to migrate off of later is way too high. I'll write a few extra TypeScript characters here and there for the stability.

hyperfekt 4y ago
Unless civet's compiled output is hard to read you could always just check in the compiled Typescript source and continue from there if it gets abandoned. Not much of a risk when the migration is built in by the way the tool works in normal use.
- yashap 4y ago
  The compiled output seems pretty clean, but isn’t necessarily what you’d write by hand. e.g. adds things like anonymous functions called immediately, when you’d probably just write a named private function, that sort of thing.

tinco 4y ago

CoffeeScript did end up winning though, all of its important features ended up in the next Javascript spec. It was a bit sad to transition into the slightly less aesthetic next Javascript release, but it also felt triumphant. To me it feels like the CoffeeScript community won. Every time I type some Javascript that's actually not fragile and not absolute garbage, I remember it's because we as a community backed CoffeeScript, and that led to the browsers listening and adding its features to Javascript. I am certain we're doing the same thing now with Typescript.