4 ms·
I use CoffeeScript whenever requirements permit. Recently I've been working on a small side project using ES6 (via iojs) and I have to admit that it's pretty re
by vectorpush 11y ago
I use CoffeeScript whenever requirements permit. Recently I've been working on a small side project using ES6 (via iojs) and I have to admit that it's pretty refreshing to see JavaScript take on some modern improvements and it's clear that today's CoffeeScript loses out on critical functionality that ES6 brings to the table.
With that stated, I still overwhelmingly prefer CoffeeScript's syntax to ES6. I'm glad ES6 took some inspiration from CoffeeScript, and Babel is a great way to bridge the future of JavaScript over to client's of the present, but I'll always prefer the CoffeeScript syntax for white-space sensitivity, support for optional semi-colons, optional parenthesis for function calls and optional curly braces for object literals. I don't need those features but I really like them. For me, the real future of JavaScript is a re-imagined CoffeeScript that takes on some refined semantics in order to bring ES6 feature support into the CoffeeScript compiler. Admittedly, that is not a simple undertaking (though I'd imagine the code would be simpler as a whole since it would necessarily trash obsolete features like pseudo-classes etc), but I know I'm not the only person who would love something like this.
I don't know how jashkenas is feeling about ES6, but one day I'll have my ES6Coffee, even if I have to brew it myself.
- jashkenas 11y agoI can answer that ;) ES6 is groovy. Many features are in the runtime and not the syntax, and just work as-is. As other syntaxful features start to come into existence and then universal implementation in most active browsers, CoffeeScript should begin offering them -- at least the ones that align with the mission statement. Some will be troublesome because of intentional syntax conflicts, like "for of" and perhaps classes. It'll just take a bit of design work to make things copacetic. That said, in the long run, the future is going to be JavaScript (if it continues to evolve) and languages that are much more radical than CoffeeScript. For more thoughts on that, see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DspYurD75Ns&t=36m57s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DspYurD75Ns&t=36m57s
- rubiquity 11y agoNice talk. Given how you end the talk, have you looked at Elm? If so, what are your thoughts and do you think it satisfies unifying HTML, CSS and JS? (Putting aside the uphill battle of gaining adoption as a static typed, FRP language)
- agumonkey 11y agoPersonal favorite quote: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DspYurD75Ns&t=39m07s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DspYurD75Ns&t=39m07s How do you envision the future ? Everything expressed as a js descendant ? no more syntactic distinctions ?
- phpnode 11y agoI suppose if CoffeeScript were reimplemented from scratch today, it would make sense to compile to an ES6 AST that could be passed on to Babel for further processing and code generation.
- k__ 11y agoSame here with LiveScript. I just feel like it's half the work coding, than with JavaScript. If they get the ES6 import/export done, I got all I need.
- thomasfoster96 11y agoCan't you do optional semicolons in JavaScript?