When looking at languages like LiveScript (or CoffeeScript) I say to myself: "Javascript has been around for 18 years, how long will this be around for?"
Not saying not to use it, but my use case has to overcome that question.
Not saying not to use it, but my use case has to overcome that question.
Even if all of the world's copies of the CoffeeScript compiler disappeared tomorrow afternoon, in between sips of tea, your compiled code would still run on every JS runtime (back to IE6), and would still be compatible with all other JavaScript libraries, and future versions of CoffeeScript as well.
The big weakness of CoffeeScript IMHO currently is the weak organizational structure of the community. I don't see a clear path where the project is going, and already there are forks/parallels like livescript and IcedCoffeeScript, both with their own strengths.
The output is usually more readable than a lot of JQuery plugins I've seen ;-)
I regard CoffeeScript and its cousins as tools rather than frameworks or languages.
Unless you're using native (or shim'd) map and similar constructs instead.
(Or, for that matter, if you're otherwise used to writing code where block scope isn't the rule.)
> The way that it creates "that" variables for temporarily holding on to "this" for a while is idiomatic.
Unless you're using bind instead.
I suppose it's true enough that people can in fact learn good things from the CS compiler output. But the JS that CS writes is not necessarily the JS an experienced dev would write or would have to write to achieve the same goals -- even taking into account the principles behind "best practices."
Also true: no matter how good something is, there'll always be someone eager to put it down.
Aaand, therefore, you might not suggest to people that a good way to learn to write good asm would be to study the output of a C compiler. However educational that experience might be.
> Also true: no matter how good something is, there'll always be someone eager to put it down.
Not sure where this is coming from unless you think we're having a conversation about the merits of a language, instead of the merits of learning another language from the output of a transpiler.