ryanflorence

11 ms·

61.
by ryanflorence 14y ago
You guys are worse than your own customers. Site looks great.
62.
by ryanflorence 14y ago
They are both awesome and compare quite well :D I think its mostly a question of the syntax you prefer (and possibly the way you'd like to manage the dependency, with ruby gems, npm, or manually).
63.
by ryanflorence 14y ago
I hate to pull the "you must work on trivial projects" card, but really, this article points out one very solid reason to use a CSS pre-processor. If you've never felt the pain of managing the colors, with gradients and everything else, I'm
64.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
> because every script compiled with every version of CoffeeScript is compatible with every other version, we're much more comfortable making changes to the language than we otherwise would be. This attitude concerns me. I can't just sa
65.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
jQuery makes the DOM so dang accessible that people use it as their data, which is completely backwards. Fortunately stuff like backbone has brought back some sanity.
66.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
Functions define scope. The end. Not hard. One rule.
67.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
I find really well-written CoffeeScript easier to comprehend and scan, even though the community at large believes I hate the stuff entirely (I don't). I'm just not sure if it's enough to make up for a less-than-optimal debugging experience
68.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
> Ryan Florence argues that if people use CoffeeScript to write JavaScript programs, maintenance will be a nightmare: I posted that article a little prematurely and more as a rant for my co-workers. It was a bit misunderstood (and it bl
69.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
Thanks for the great response Jeremy. It's a ton of fun to write. That's why. I absolutely love writing it. That alone is why I didn't pull the plug on it at work. I have great feelings of guilt for posting that article w/o talking more abo
70.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
Well, AMD is essentially a CommonJS format, so this is what "people have come up with" for the browsers until real modules show up :) http://wiki.commonjs.org/wiki/Modules/AsynchronousDefinition
71.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
> That would change if you practiced reading other peoples' code. I'm really active on github, and actually read the source code of a lot of projects instead of reading books, and contribute to a bunch of them too. Quite assuming of you
72.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
Again I say, you should have caught that I missed the `key` every bit as much as I forgot it ;)
73.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
I do find it interesting that you didn't go "Oh, if he's got an object, he just missed `key`" so I could argue you likewise not as proficient as you could be :P
74.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
We replied simultaneously, view my response above, and yes, I'd also do `for own key, plate` in real code (which I think its really awesome).
75.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
Dishes is an object, a dish is an object. I know what I'm doing :) dishes = { ryansPlate: { dirty: true }, yourPlate: { dirty: false }, hisPlate: { dirty: false } } Now go into the debugger, find the _ref, and
76.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
It's totally natural. So if you prefer CS don't let using a third-party lib change your mind.
77.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
Source maps will be helpful, but I still can't put a break point in my coffee script from the browser.
78.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
Woah, missed a whole section: > This is not a valid construct. By using "of" you are iterating through the keys of dishes, which will inevitable be strings. No, they are objects with properties like "dirty", not strings. Dishes is an ob
79.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
> "I find the proposition that porting a library (no matter the size) gives you "as much experience as anyone" pretty dubious" My intro comes off as though I'm claiming to be some sort of authority, which wasn't my intention at all. So
80.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
> if/when browsers natively support CS. They won't, and source maps are not native support. Check out AMD with RequireJS (make sure you optimize) for your "import" stuff. I haven't incorporated optimization yet for the project, but you
81.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
consequence is still on the left edge in my rewrites though, not sure why you'd want to mute control flow aside from reading it out loud. Admittedly, you can still do some ugly one-liners in JS, the undertone of all my points though is that
82.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
That's a good point, and I've actually adjusted my color scheme to make fat and thin arrows different brightness, the fat brighter to call it out more.
83.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
I'll save the fat arrow discussion for my next post, but the only point here is that it encourages nesting.
84.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
Go ahead and [do this horrible thing], it's not _that_ bad. > especially given the still-crude state of JavaScript debugging tools in general I feel like people don't know how to use web inspector... There will never be native CoffeeScr
85.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
once you turn a comprehension into a multi-line block of code it looks just like JavaScript, so ... :\
86.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
widget = attach: -> @el.bind 'click', @handler handler: (event) => doStuffWithThis() wrong. Handler is bound to whatever scope widget is in. http://jashkenas.github.com/coffee-script/#try:widge
87.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
> Why is [fat arrow] evil in Coffeescript, but okay in jQuery? I'm writing a specific article on the issues with the fat-arrow, but the difference is nesting callbacks v. assigning. I like the fat arrow in `class`.
88.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
Source mapping will be helpful, but clearly fewer people than I'd expect know how to use the debugging tools in their browser to the extent that I use them. I don't want a line number, I want a break point or watch expression in my code w
89.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
We scan the left side of the code when reading. Checking the right side of the code to see if it actually will execute must invariably be slower. Also, the language encourages super long comprehensions.
90.
by ryanflorence 15y ago
The code smells are on the demo page for CoffeeScript.

More ›