4 ms·
To all the sibling commenters defending the merits of CoffeeScript: - https://discuss.atom.io/t/why-coffeescript/131 https://discuss.atom.io/t/why-coffeescript
by anon3_ 11y ago
To all the sibling commenters defending the merits of CoffeeScript:
- https://discuss.atom.io/t/why-coffeescript/131 https://discuss.atom.io/t/why-coffeescript/131
- https://meta.discourse.org/t/is-it-better-for-discourse-to-use-javascript-or-coffeescript/3153 https://meta.discourse.org/t/is-it-better-for-discourse-to-u...
- yellowapple 11y agoTranslation: "more people know JavaScript than CoffeeScript, so you shouldn't bother with CoffeeScript" More people are familiar with Notepad than vi. Does that make vi a bad choice?
- mwcampbell 11y ago> More people are familiar with Notepad than vi. Does that make vi a bad choice? That analogy doesn't work, because editors don't have network effects, whereas programming languages do.
- saidajigumi 11y ago> editors don't have network effects The 82 plugins in my current vim setup really, really beg to differ.
- scrollaway 11y agoThere's many reasons why that analogy doesn't work, and "network effect" isn't one. Appropriate tool, appropriate job.
- yellowapple 11y agoI'd argue that Javascript is never the appropriate tool for any job, but to each his/her own :)