I was looking at some of my old repos today. Enjoyed the nostalgia. Lots of CoffeeScript there. I had to switch to ES and then TypeScript because CoffeeScript was abandoned at the time and I was stretched over other projects to be able to help maintain it.
Reading my old code, I was surprised by how clean it looks. How easy it is to digest. There is a certain sense of calm when your brain doesn't have to process all the visual clutter of a C-style syntax. I miss that.
I wish I didn't have to choose between CoffeeScript and TypeScript.
TypeScript first and foremost is about type safety and tooling. Its architecture is largely syntax-agnostic. It operates on the AST, so the parser and code generator can be swapped for a different syntax.
CoffeeScript is all about syntax and does not (and should not) concern itself with most of the semantics.
They could theoretically be used together if TypeScript simply allowed custom parsers/generators/formatters to be plugged in.
This would work with ESLint and other JS tooling as well. I did a POC on that a few years ago [0].
[0] https://github.com/gkz/LiveScript/issues/821#issuecomment-18...
Reading my old code, I was surprised by how clean it looks. How easy it is to digest. There is a certain sense of calm when your brain doesn't have to process all the visual clutter of a C-style syntax. I miss that.
I wish I didn't have to choose between CoffeeScript and TypeScript.
TypeScript first and foremost is about type safety and tooling. Its architecture is largely syntax-agnostic. It operates on the AST, so the parser and code generator can be swapped for a different syntax.
CoffeeScript is all about syntax and does not (and should not) concern itself with most of the semantics.
They could theoretically be used together if TypeScript simply allowed custom parsers/generators/formatters to be plugged in.
This would work with ESLint and other JS tooling as well. I did a POC on that a few years ago [0].
[0] https://github.com/gkz/LiveScript/issues/821#issuecomment-18...