Jason (jcreed) wrote,
Jason
jcreed

I find certain parts of the following article so baffling that it triggers some sort of Poe's law in my brain:
https://github.com/raganwald/homoiconic/blob/master/2011/12/jargon.md#readme
There are certainly practical arguments to be made against languages that have fairly shallow but not entirely trivial translations to javascript. I think the difficulty of debugging without specialized debugging tools for the source language is the best one. But exhibiting 9 narrow lines of source language program, and 30 wide, wide lines of javascript (claiming that what the Proper Design-Pattern-Using Programmer really *means* is the 30 lines) is not. I am a firm believer that design patterns that cannot otherwise be compressed into a libraries are a sign your programming language is missing a feature. Everything else in this rant sounds like someone arguing that languages like C will never catch on, because Real Programmers know how to do it in ASM.

--

Uh. I got to the end of the article and it seems to be making a case *for* coffeescript after all. Ok. whatever. That is a weird rhetorical technique, then.
Tags: programming
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 5 comments