|
|
|
|
|
|
by raganwald
4862 days ago
|
|
|
I find this a curious debate to have so early in Discourse's life. There doesn't appear to be a pain point, so it's mostly speculation. If this happens, then that consequence, but if this happens, then that other consequence... I would stick with CoffeeScript until it becomes painful. There is relatively little downside risk. If and when you have great people refusing to contribute code because they hate CoffeeScript, well, that'll be a pain point. On the other hand, what if you get a bunch of other people who like contributing code because they can do it in CoffeeScript? Are there meaningful statistics collected? Until there are, or at least a weighty collection of anecdotes, I'm sure there's something more important to worry about. |
|
|
The sheer mass of anti-CoffeeScript FUD ironically makes it more likely that they'll get more contributions if they go back to JavaScript. ;) YOU might know people who seriously consider Erlang and Clojure, but most people respond badly to superficial syntactical differences.
Of course, is "contributions" really the best metric? What about productivity or quality? And can they make it so that people can easily contribute JavaScript?
(Even among people I know, I've heard such irrational FUD against CoffeeScript. And I know it's FUD because none of their boogiemen came true after I aggressively introduced it into their codebase. They now use it every day without concern. Most people hate innovation, including programmers.)
In particular, the ES6 argument sounds like FUD. Did they link to timelines and CoffeeScript developers' opinions? And where's the tradeoff analysis comparing the immediate productivity benefits of CoffeeScript vs some future ES6 event?