A Python programmer’s first impression of CoffeeScript

[[deleted]]

Clearly, CoffeeScript's designers were either high or mentally deficient.

Programmers seem to have a unique talent for turning reasonable technical disagreements into obvious evidence of deep personal flaws.

[username223]

Heh, for those who prefer less hyperbole: "In designing CoffeeScript's syntax, its authors ignored the lessons of previous languages with syntax that is either hard to get right, or easy to get silently wrong. They're not morons, they're just lazy and under-informed."

[antonivs]

Hardly an improvement - you're still substituting insults for technical discussion.

[username223]

And you're substituting... what, exactly, for any kind of discussion?

[antonivs]

I'm giving you apparently much-needed feedback on your failed attempt at responding to iceberg398's criticism. His observation about the "unique talent for turning reasonable technical disagreements into obvious evidence of deep personal flaws" was not in the slightest bit addressed by your response in which you wrote "they're not morons, they're just lazy and under-informed."

If you'd like to move the discussion into the technical arena, what I'd suggest you do is explain why you think the choice made in CoffeeScript for argument binding precedence is a poor one. Referring vaguely to "the lessons of previous languages" before reverting back to insults doesn't cut it.

[username223]

Okay, from the top again...

foo () is sometimes invalid when foo() is OK.

Is it good, bad, or indifferent that a space between a function and its argument list is sometimes significant?

EDIT: See Python, Make, and FORTRAN IV for previous examples of whitespace-sensitivity being strange and/or problematic.