[naitsirc]

Not trying to sell CoffeeScript here but most reasons of the author for dropping it looks more like a fault of the developer instead of the tool.

* Ambiguous syntax? Just add a few parenthesis.

* You don't like the existencial operator? Learn some JS, being able to easily differentiate between a truthy value and the existence of a variable with a single character is as sweet as it can get.

* Comparing a language to Babel? Doesn't make sense. Babel translate ES6/2015 to ES5 for compatibility. Comparing ES6/2015 to CoffeeScript makes sense.

* CoffeeScript is the reason you couldn't scale/solve data syncing or redrawable views? JS/CS/TypeScript/etc have nothing to do with that! Maybe he was thinking about Backbone?

Seems like the guy is confusing tools and languages... and making (bad) decisions because of that.

Personally I'm not going back to writing { }, return and ;'s :-)

[avmich]

Language should be natural enough for the person to use and good enough to apply for the problem at hand. We don't yet know how to have consistently good solutions for these requirements.

For me, {} are better than spaces - perhaps because of habits, but what will I get in - non-effortless - changing my habit in this place? "Add a few parenthesis" advice seems the opposite - don't we want not to have to use artifacts for clarification, but have simple and natural defaults working? Etc.

[redka]

It's not a choice of this versus that. In CoffeeScript you don't write spaces instead {} - you write neither. You express this with indentation anyway so why the extra boilerplate? CoffeeScript removes a lot of the excess work while TypeScript actually does the opposite.

[tallerholler]

I completely agree with you but I think another reason some people aren't as keen to coffeescript as others might have to do with their other coding experiences/languages/habits...

Coming from many years of python development, coffeescript is a natural fit...