3 ms·
To me this interview underlines the accomplishment of CoffeeScript. No committees. No marketing team. No developer evangelists. No PR team. No corporate intere
by andyl 14y ago
To me this interview underlines the accomplishment of CoffeeScript.
No committees. No marketing team. No developer evangelists. No PR team. No corporate interests. No budget.
Just code.
- rayiner 14y agoAlso nobody with the sense of history to design proper lexical scoping of variables.
- baudehlo 14y agoTo achieve that CS would have had to put everything with a new variable inside a new function scope, having a major impact on performance and readability of the generated code.
- kevingadd 14y agoIt's possible to detect name collisions in a compiler and only generate scopes when needed...
- gruseom 14y agoParenscript gets lexical scoping by renaming variables (but only where necessary). It works fine. The original variable name is used as a prefix, so the generated code remains readable.
- snprbob86 14y agoThis has been covered over, and over, and over again. CoffeeScript has some explicit goals with respect to the generated JavaScript output, and that includes not mucking with your identifiers. In order to implement correct lexical scoping, you'd need to rewrite identifiers to avoid shadowing and collision. CoffeeScript's design is a very reasonable trade off given the inadequacies of JavaScript.
- rwaldron 14y ago...No formal semantic or syntactic specification...